Re: [Full-Disclosure] (AUSCERT AA-2004.02) AUSCERT Advisory - Den ial of Service Vulnerability in IEEE 802.11 Wireless Devices (fwd)

[Phil Brutsche <phil@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Seth Alan Woolley wrote:


> This is annoying.  I once did a similar thing to a netgear "managed"
> switch setup in two VLANs.  Experimenting, I setup a crossover cable
> between the two VLANs to see how real the separation was.  My theory was
> that it would work like having two separate switches.  I was wrong.  It
> took down the whole network as if I had run a crossover back into a
> switch that wasn't partitioned.  I don't know whether or not this is a
> bug or not, but it makes me wonder just how good this netgear managed
> switch is and if I should replace it with something better for my
> internal DMZ purposes.

Netgear is hardly unique.

I've seen Extreme Networks (Summit 48) and Cisco (Catalyst 2924XL-EN - 
an IOS-based switch if you must know) suffer from the same malady.

It's quite common when you have teenagers who don't know any better 
trying to test switchports faster...

--

Phil Brutsche
phil@xxxxxxxxxxxx

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html