Security Basics mailing list archives
RE: Cable Vs. DSL
From: "Cosentino, Guilherme V." <Guilherme.Cosentino () alcoa com br>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 17:00:02 -0300
I found a very good document about this issue on http://www.sans.org/rr/homeoffice/sniffing.php Must read it. Rgrds Guilherme -----Original Message----- From: Xueyan Liu [mailto:xueyall () yahoo com] Sent: Friday, 25 de April de 2003 4:36 PM To: Cosentino, Guilherme V.; 'Chris Travers' Cc: security-basics () securityfocus com Subject: RE: Cable Vs. DSL --- "Cosentino, Guilherme V." <Guilherme.Cosentino () alcoa com br> wrote:
Here in Brazil,in most cases, traffic between customers and ISP is "tunneled" by PPPoE after cable modem boot and POST. The communication between cable modems is not allowed due to the config file parameters received just after the boot. Unfortunately, the official documentation of Managing Committee (a brazilian task force that writes recommendations to Internet use) are in Portuguese. BTW, here's the link: http://www.cg.org.br/grupo/seg_cabo.htm My question is: Is it possible to snif encapsulated traffic? I don't think so, but maybe I'm wrong...
I would think you can. Encapsulation just add another header in front as long as the data (payload) itself is not encrypted. Xueyan
Guilherme -----Original Message----- From: Chris Travers [mailto:chris () travelamericas com] Sent: Thursday, 24 de April de 2003 11:00 PM To: Xueyan Liu Cc: security-basics () securityfocus com Subject: Re: Cable Vs. DSL Xueyan Liu wrote:since you brought up router/firewall, do you thinkasimple router such as linksys or netgear which does NAT, drop based on port number and port forwarding provides enough security for SOHO users behind a cable/dsl modem? XueyanHi Xuehan; My own opinion is that for a SOHO office this is generally enough of a security *product* when combined with good anti-virus software because these routers effectively create a barrier by not allowing inbound connections in their default settings. However, this does not prevent trojans using *outbound* connections from being installed via email.... But no security product can provide *enough security*. Instead. I think, it is important to combine it with awareness of social engineering/email and virus-like trojans, etc. Best Wishes, Chris Travers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training Europe, May 12-15 in Amsterdam, the world's premier event for IT and network security experts. The two-day Training features 6 hand-on courses on May 12-13 taught by professionals. The two-day Briefings on May 14-15 features 24 top speakers with no vendor sales pitches. Deadline for the best rates is April 25. Register today to ensure your place. http://www.securityfocus.com/BlackHat-security-basics ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- Re: Cable Vs. DSL, (continued)
- Re: Cable Vs. DSL Paris Stone (Apr 23)
- RE: Cable Vs. DSL Jacob McMaster (Apr 23)
- RE: Cable Vs. DSL Mike Heitz (Apr 23)
- RE: Cable Vs. DSL Xueyan Liu (Apr 24)
- RE: Cable Vs. DSL David Gillett (Apr 25)
- Re: Cable Vs. DSL Chris Travers (Apr 25)
- Re: Cable Vs. DSL Callan K L Tham (Apr 25)
- Re: Cable Vs. DSL Frank Gearhart (Apr 28)
- RE: Cable Vs. DSL Xueyan Liu (Apr 24)
- RE: Cable Vs. DSL Lucas Zaichkowsky (Apr 23)
- Re: Cable Vs. DSL David Vertie (Apr 24)
- RE: Cable Vs. DSL Cosentino, Guilherme V. (Apr 28)
- RE: Cable Vs. DSL Cosentino, Guilherme V. (Apr 28)
- RE: Cable Vs. DSL Xueyan Liu (Apr 28)
- Re: Cable Vs. DSL Chris Berry (Apr 29)
- Re: Cable Vs. DSL Brian Eckman (Apr 30)
- RE: Cable Vs. DSL Jordan Jesse - Toronto-MROC (Apr 30)