Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 11:15:07 -0400 (EDT) From: "Crist J. Clark" <cjc@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> To: dgilbert@velocet.ca (David Gilbert) Cc: Harry_M_Leitzell@cmu.edu, fred@fredbox.com, security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: DHCP (was Re: poink attack (was Re: ARP problem in Windows9X/NT)) Message-ID: <199904201515.LAA09694@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> In-Reply-To: <14108.38235.254919.924353@trooper.velocet.ca> from David Gilbert at "Apr 20, 99 10:55:23 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David Gilbert wrote, > Not this discussion 'should' be about what 'should' be, but wouldn't > it make sense to have the DHCP server be the 'athority' by which > hardware addresses are resolved? I suppose there's little security > built into that protocol, too. We recently went to implement it for a > customer and were somewhat taken aback by what could happen if someone > managed to just 'connect' a laptop to the network who wasn't supposed > to. OK, I'll bite. What happens when someone who is not supposed to connects to a DHCP served network? (Besides that they are connected to the network and are not supposed to be.) -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@home.com 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?199904201515.LAA09694>