All interested parties might want to re-review the PSIRT advisory at
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20030717-blocked.shtml

Please make sure that you are reading the latest advisory (Version 1.3 as of
this email)

Frank Jimenez, CCIE #5738
Systems Engineer
Cisco Systems, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 4:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: a really big bug [7:72463]


It sounds like this is a hypothetical packet and situation that Cisco quality
assurance discovered. I thought it was something already being exploited,
but it
doesn't sound like it. In that case, I guess I support Cisco not telling us
more
about it.

It's sort of an age-old security question of how much info to publish. The
info
would help the white hats, but also the black hats.

Unfortunately, I can't look at bug reports (even with my guest access!?)
Maybe
there's more in the bug reports. I still want to know more about these
packets.
:-) But I guess I'll have to do more research....

Priscilla

M.C. van den Bovenkamp wrote:
>
> Duncan Maccubbin wrote:
>
> > I was on a conference call with Cisco and the Cisco rep felt
> we were
> > overreacting by rushing to change our code right away, He
> said that the
> > packet was extremely difficult to create and the person would
> have to be a
> > "genius" to make it.
>
> As we don't know exactly *what* you need to do, it's difficult to say
> whether he's right or not. But my gut says he's wrong; as soon
> as you
> *do* know, there are 'packetfactory'-tools enough about...
>
>               Regards,
>
>                       Marco.




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=72534&t=72534
--------------------------------------------------
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