From: Jay Hennigan (jay@west.net)
Date: Wed Jul 16 2003 - 22:02:27 GMT-3
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Charles Church wrote:
> It seems like the router would need to process a malformed packet for it to
> affect it, as in the router itself is the IP destination. Is this true? If
> so, it seems an ACL could protect it. Any additional info on it, Jay?
This would make sense, as otherwise the attacker would only succeed in
shutting down the router closest to the source of the attack. Not sure
if an ACL would be effective depending on the nature of the attack. If
the logic in the router gets wedged examining it for the ACL to handle,
then the ACL would be of no value.
It's hitting the mainstream press now. Nothing from PSIRT or Cisco's
customer security mailing list.
Links:
http://news.com.com/2100-1035_3-1026518.html
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/cnet/stories/1026518.htm
-- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - jay@west.net WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323 WB6RDV NetLojix Communications, Inc. - http://www.netlojix.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Aug 06 2003 - 06:52:42 GMT-3