Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 19 Dec 2000 16:33:12 -0600
From:      Bill Fumerola <billf@mu.org>
To:        Chuck Rock <carock@epconline.net>
Cc:        security@FreeBSD.ORG, questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: What anti-sniffer measures do i have?
Message-ID:  <20001219163312.P72273@elvis.mu.org>
In-Reply-To: <009001c06a0a$b2163170$1805010a@epconline.net>; from carock@epconline.net on Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 04:26:13PM -0600
References:  <200012192213.PAA04005@harmony.village.org> <009001c06a0a$b2163170$1805010a@epconline.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 04:26:13PM -0600, Chuck Rock wrote:
> I believe most switches are Layer 2 which is MAC based. You would have to
> know the MAC address of the computer you want to intercept traffic for, and
> then your switch would have to give you the packets instead of erroring out
> and or dropping the packets because you can't have two of the same MAC
> addresses on the network.
> 
> Has anyone actually gotten another's information spoofing MAC addresses?
> 
> I don't see how this could work.

Some switches do bad things when one port reports lots(for various definitions
of lots) of MAC addresses behind one port.

-- 
Bill Fumerola - security yahoo         / Yahoo! inc.
              - fumerola@yahoo-inc.com / billf@FreeBSD.org





To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001219163312.P72273>