From owner-freebsd-security Mon Apr 9 21:57:38 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from cs4.cs.ait.ac.th (cs4.cs.ait.ac.th [192.41.170.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D26537B422 for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 21:57:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from on@cs.ait.ac.th) Received: from banyan.cs.ait.ac.th (on@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th [192.41.170.5]) by cs4.cs.ait.ac.th (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA10569; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:56:08 +0700 (GMT+0700) Received: (from on@localhost) by banyan.cs.ait.ac.th (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA10040; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:57:24 +0700 (ICT) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:57:24 +0700 (ICT) Message-Id: <200104100457.LAA10040@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> X-Authentication-Warning: banyan.cs.ait.ac.th: on set sender to on@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th using -f From: Olivier Nicole To: mikel@ocsinternet.com Cc: JHowie@msn.com, jwyatt@rwsystems.net, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: <3AD1C188.F34164C7@ocsinternet.com> (message from Mikel on Mon, 09 Apr 2001 10:04:56 -0400) Subject: Re: Theory Question References: <05dd01c0c00d$657a8510$0101a8c0@development.local> <3AD1C188.F34164C7@ocsinternet.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >I've heard this as well; and seem to remember hearing it while attending some >cisco training or something. I fully agree, that they aren't very good for >security, and truthfully I don't think they're very good for a busy network >either... As a Cisco guru once said in a security seminar (must have been apricot few years back), one and only design of Vlan is contention of broadcast. Anything beyond that is pushing security risk. Olivier To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message