[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <40A3F424.8060407@tux.obix.com>
From: phil at tux.obix.com (Phil Brutsche)
Subject: (AUSCERT AA-2004.02) AUSCERT Advisory - Den
ial of Service Vulnerability in IEEE 802.11 Wireless Devices (fwd)
Seth Alan Woolley wrote:
> This is annoying. I once did a similar thing to a netgear "managed"
> switch setup in two VLANs. Experimenting, I setup a crossover cable
> between the two VLANs to see how real the separation was. My theory was
> that it would work like having two separate switches. I was wrong. It
> took down the whole network as if I had run a crossover back into a
> switch that wasn't partitioned. I don't know whether or not this is a
> bug or not, but it makes me wonder just how good this netgear managed
> switch is and if I should replace it with something better for my
> internal DMZ purposes.
Netgear is hardly unique.
I've seen Extreme Networks (Summit 48) and Cisco (Catalyst 2924XL-EN -
an IOS-based switch if you must know) suffer from the same malady.
It's quite common when you have teenagers who don't know any better
trying to test switchports faster...
--
Phil Brutsche
phil@....obix.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists