RE: VALN hopping

From: Hayes, Ian (Ian.Hayes_at_wynnlasvegas.com)
Date: 09/29/05

  • Next message: dave kleiman: "RE: Hard Drive Intergrety Status" 
    To: <security-basics@securityfocus.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:50:37 -0700

    Safeguard against traversing VLANs is getting better, but I still don't
    like the idea of having mixed security VLANs on the same switch. There
    are still a number of exploits that have a chance of working, such as
    CAM table flooding. IMHO, good design physically separates the security
    zones- you really can't rely that logical constraints are going to
    always work, but then I'm a belt-and-suspenders kind of guy when it
    comes to network design. I'm expecting something to fail.

    Ian Hayes | Senior Systems Engineer
    Wynn Las Vegas
    3131 South Las Vegas Blvd, Las Vegas, NV 89109
    Ph (702) 770-3252 | Cell (702) 266-6002
    Ian.hayes@wynnlasvegas.com
     
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: josh@tstc.edu [mailto:josh@tstc.edu]
    > Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 9:59 AM
    > To: security-basics@securityfocus.com
    > Subject: VALN hopping
    >
    > WWe are having a heated discussion about using VLAN's as a type of
    DMZ, so
    > I am asking the experts. I prsonally like to see physical isolation;
    > however, our network person doesn't feel there is a threat of VLAN
    > hopping. Please let me know your opinions.
    >
    > Thank you,
    >

  • Next message: dave kleiman: "RE: Hard Drive Intergrety Status"
    • Quantcast