Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 18:11:36 -0800 From: Robert Clark <res03db2@gte.net> To: John Howie <JHowie@msn.com> Cc: Robert Clark <res03db2@gte.net>, Artem Koutchine <matrix@ipform.ru>, security@FreeBSD.ORG, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Antisniffer measures (digest of posts) Message-ID: <20010105181136.B17723@darkstar.gte.net> In-Reply-To: <01c501c07773$180d40c0$0101a8c0@development.local>; from JHowie@msn.com on Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 03:56:16PM -0800 References: <000701c07750$eb585e60$0c00a8c0@ipform.ru> <20010105154601.A17529@darkstar.gte.net> <01c501c07773$180d40c0$0101a8c0@development.local>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I know that ring networks see the traffic as it goes around, I was more interested in whether the respective NIC chipsets allow for permiscous mode. I seem to remember that its not a given that all network type hardware allows sniffing. FDDI? [RC] On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 03:56:16PM -0800, John Howie wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Clark" <res03db2@gte.net> > To: "Artem Koutchine" <matrix@ipform.ru> > Cc: <security@FreeBSD.ORG>; <questions@FreeBSD.ORG> > Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 3:46 PM > Subject: Re: Antisniffer measures (digest of posts) > > > > I wonder if token ring suffers from this problem? 100VG? > > Token Ring is worst of all - all data must pass through every node on the > ring. Token Bus is no more secure. 100VG offers no better protection than > most switchable hubs. > > john... > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010105181136.B17723>