Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 11:27:43 +0100 (MET) From: cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de (Martin Cracauer) To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith) Cc: cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de, freebsd-security@freeBSD.org Subject: Re: Risk of having bpf0? (was URGENT: Packet sniffer found on my system) Message-ID: <9612121027.AA28380@wavehh.hanse.de> In-Reply-To: <199612120001.KAA29724@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at Dec 12, 96 10:31:46 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[me] > > And in what way can BPF make spoofing easier? [Michael Smith] > The ability to emit arbitrary network data, subject only to the > framing imposed by the transport hardware. Sure. But (for me) your former statement was misleading. In context it sounded like a machine with BPF was more vulnerable to a spoofing attack, while you obviously meant it is easier to launch such an attack. Martin -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer <cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de> http://cracauer.cons.org Fax +49 40 522 85 36
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9612121027.AA28380>