bugtraq - Re: STP mitm attack idea

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <o2w85c7eb2d1004281426i78ba43ccp1d0cd10217490b29@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:26:09 -0400
From: "Jason T. Masker" <jason@...ker.net>
To: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: STP mitm attack idea

Jann Horn <jannhorn@...glemail.com> wrote on 04/28/2010 12:20:55 PM:
> From:
>
> Jann Horn <jannhorn@...glemail.com>
>
...
> If you had a WLAN-link, you could simplify that a lot - as far as I
> understand, you are able to make the switches redirect the traffic to
> your machines.
> Anyway, this attack sounds like something a good switch can easily
> prevent by having a list of "STP trusted ports" or something like that.
> Doesn't that exist?

Best practice is to implement layer 2 security mechanisms which would
identify these ports as "access" ports and shut them down if any STP
traffic was received through these interfaces. On Cisco equipment,
this is known as BPDU guard.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/customer/tech/tk389/tk621/technologies_tech_note09186a008009482f.shtml