Linux Security
 
Forums: » Register « |  User CP |  Games |  Calendar |  Members |  FAQs |  Sitemap |  Support | 
 
User Name:
Password:
Remember me
Go Back   Web Development Archives Mailing Lists Linux Security

Reply
Add This Thread To:
  Del.icio.us   Digg   Google   Spurl   Blink   Furl   Simpy   Y! MyWeb 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Unread Web Development Archives Sponsor:
  #1  
Old July 16th, 2007, 10:19 AM
Boyan Tabakov
Guest
Dev Archives Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Posts: n/a  
Time spent in forums:
Reputation Power:
packet labeling & routing decision based on these labels

Monday 16 July 2007 17:30:38 Philipp Snizek wrote:
Yes. That would help it and also stop man in the middle at least between
the switch and the Hosts n.
have you got experience what performance impact 802.1x has on 1GBit/s
ethernet?

As I said before, you can do with simply allowing no more than one MAC address
to appear on a single switch port. You could also set the allowed mack
addresses manually. This eliminates the need of authentication (802.1x or
not). So no overhead.

--
Blade hails you

night I dreamt a white rose withering
a newborn drowning a lifetime loneliness
I dreamt all my future. Relived my past
And witnessed the beauty of the beast


PGP SIGNATURE
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)


zaeKd0frInj47o7oYG8IIj0=
=tlTU
PGP SIGNATURE

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old July 17th, 2007, 06:19 AM
Boyan Tabakov
Guest
Dev Archives Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Posts: n/a  
Time spent in forums:
Reputation Power:
packet labeling & routing decision based on these labels

Monday 16 July 2007 19:28:17 Philipp Snizek wrote:
Monday 16 July 2007 17:30:38 Philipp Snizek wrote:
>Yes. That would help it and also stop man in the middle at least between
>the switch and the Hosts n.
>have you got experience what performance impact 802.1x has on 1GBit/s
>ethernet?
>

As I said before, you can do with simply allowing no more than one MAC
address
to appear on a single switch port. You could also set the allowed mack
addresses manually. This eliminates the need of authentication (802.1x or
not). So no overhead.
>

Networks cannot be secured by adding static MAC addresses to a switch
(e.g. Cisco 29xx, port security feature).
You start the legal client, write down its ip and mac, start your illegal
notebook were you are root, spoof the mac and the ip, unplug the network
cable from the client, plug it into the notebook. The switch will think
you just unplugged and plugged the very same client.
>

Please teach me otherwise should I be wrong.
>

Philipp

That is correct, but here you have no man-in-the-middle. The trick works just
fine when you have the laptop connected to a different end-point, trying to
sniff other people's traffic.

You are talking about a network that is not phisically secure. Then you do
need proper authentication.

--
Blade hails you

Teach me passion for I fear it's gone
Show me love, hold the lorn
So much more I wanted to give to the ones who love me
I'm sorry
Time will tell (this bitter farewell)
I live no more to shame nor me nor you
And you I wish I didn't feel for you anymore


PGP SIGNATURE
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)


RnwS2uCKJ18r0SK+RFJ8AUk=
=e19P
PGP SIGNATURE

Reply With Quote
Reply

Viewing: Web Development Archives Mailing Lists Linux Security > packet labeling & routing decision based on these labels


Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes  Rate This Thread 
Rate This Thread:


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
View Your Warnings | New Posts | Latest Threads | Shoutbox
Forum Jump


Forums: » Register « |  User CP |  Games |  Calendar |  Members |  FAQs |  Sitemap |  Support | 
  
 





© 2003-2008 by Developer Shed. All rights reserved. DS Cluster 4 hosted by Hostway