>I understand most of the benefits of frame relay, but I am wondering if =
>there are any security problems assoicated with this protocol?  Is it =
>secure enough for unencrypted transfer of financial or sensitive =
>information?  Any help understanding the security risks associated with =
>frame relay appreciated.
>
>-- Kevin

Is a dedicated line secure enough for unencrypted transfer of 
financial or sensitive information?

Answer:  It depends.

People often assume that frame is somehow shared when "dedicated 
lines" are not.   From Chapter 5 of my _WAN Survival Guide_,

>All too many users have an intuitive belief that if they were to 
>pull on the London end of a London to New York circuit, wires would 
>wiggle in Manhattan. The reality, of course, is that any network of 
>complexity beyond a very simple LAN involves one or more layers of 
>virtualization onto real media. At the OSI lower layers, 
>virtualization usually involves multiplexing, but various name and 
>address mapping functions provide virtual structure as one moves up 
>the protocol stack.

Typically, frame PVCs and T1's run over exactly the same media from 
the customer site to the telco end office.  Once at the end office, 
they are multiplexed.  T1 is far too slow for economical data 
transmission between modern telco offices.  Both the T1 and the frame 
circuits typically will be multiplexed onto facilities at least at 
DS-3, and usually OC-12 to OC-192. So much beyond the local loop, 
there really isn't much difference between frame and dedicated.

Interpretations in the US HIPAA legislation for medical data tend to 
allow unencrypted traffic to flow over dedicated and frame, but not 
the public Internet.  The Federal Reserve, however, tends to want 
end-to-end encryption regardless of the media, historically single 
DES.  Military traffic would be bulk encrypted and possibly 
end-to-end encrypted as well.

_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to