Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 11 Dec 2000 07:57:32 -0500
From:      "David Erickson" <erickson@mddsg.com>
To:        "Jeff Fulton" <jefff@fulton.net.au>, "Roman Shterenzon" <roman@xpert.com>
Cc:        <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: MAC Address
Message-ID:  <001001c06371$ece41a00$cc02a8c0@columbia.mentis.org>
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.30.0012110914240.12823-100000@jamus.xpert.com> <020401c06370$1ca77f40$2001a8c0@amoeba>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On a cisco switch the proper way to get around that would be to have the
original and it's duplicate on a spanning ports for eachother that way the
switch wouldn't care it would always send the packets to both ports and only
one would respond at any given time.  But Fortunately i dont have to worry
about that because i have a stupid Netgear switch at home which really seems
to not care what i do mac address wise.  It picks up on the changes almost
instantly.

Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Fulton" <jefff@fulton.net.au>
To: "Roman Shterenzon" <roman@xpert.com>; "David Erickson"
<erickson@mddsg.com>
Cc: <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: MAC Address


> The switch learns your location when it processes a packet sent by you.
> Once you're in the station cache, you'll get timed out if you don't send
> anything for a minute or two.  If a rogue duplicate sends something, the
> station cache will be modified to point to him.  Of course, it may change
> straight back if the real owner transmits something again.
>
> I don't think both the rogue and the duplicate can be in the station cache
> at the same time.
>
> Regards,
> jeff Fulton
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roman Shterenzon" <roman@xpert.com>
> To: "David Erickson" <erickson@mddsg.com>
> Cc: <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 6:16 PM
> Subject: Re: MAC Address
>
>
> > On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, David Erickson wrote:
> >
> > > > Sounds to me all this is just_slightly_unethical_if
> > > > _not_bordering_on_illegal. This is a topic for a security mailing
> list?
> > > > I thought we were here to boost network security, not circumvent it.
> > > > Just a network technician's opinion.
> > >
> > > How is it unethical to change ones MAC address?  First of all a MAC
> address
> > > is only used on your local LAN segment.  MAC Addresses do not traverse
> over
> > > IP.  Once your traffic hits a router the traffic is then relayed.  ARP
> is
> >
> > The most interesting question is if I know some mac address on a
switched
> > network and then I set my mac address to this address, if some switches
> > _will_ deliver packets to me as well? It might be interesting sniffing
> > strategy on a switched network if some switches work this way.
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > --Roman Shterenzon, UNIX System Administrator and Consultant
> > [ Xpert UNIX Systems Ltd., Herzlia, Israel. Tel: +972-9-9522361 ]
> >
> >
> >
> > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> > with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
> >
>
>



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?001001c06371$ece41a00$cc02a8c0>