- Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: OT: Cisco.com password reset.
by Church, Chuck 03 Aug '05

03 Aug '05

I eventually got an email stating it couldn't associate my email address with an active CCO ID. I'm guessing their system is getting backed up because it's affecting lots of people. Next step: "Please email cco-team(a)cisco.com to have your correct email address associated with your User ID. To ensure you receive prompt attention, please provide all of the following details: 1 Maintenance contract or Account number you used in your registration 2 The user ID your believe you have 3 Full name 4 Company name " Chuck Church Lead Design Engineer CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE Netco Government Services - Design & Implementation 1210 N. Parker Rd. Greenville, SC 29609 Home office: 864-335-9473 Cell: 703-819-3495 cchurch(a)netcogov.com PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x4371A48D -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Mike Tancsa Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 9:52 AM To: Dan Armstrong Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: OT: Cisco.com password reset. Same here. I didnt get a notice that it was reset, but I cannot login ---Mike At 09:30 AM 03/08/2005, Dan Armstrong wrote: >My PW to CCO did not work this morning either. I am on hold with the TAC >right now.... > > > >Joe Blanchard wrote: > >>FYI >>I got an email that my CCO account's password was reset >>last night. Not sure how widespread this issue was, but >>I called my account contact and verified that this is >>a valid email, and that my password needed to be reset. >> >>Just a heads up. >> >>-Joe Blanchard >> >> >>

4 3

Re: Your router/switch may be less secure than you think
by Robert Bonomi 03 Aug '05

03 Aug '05

> From owner-nanog(a)merit.edu Wed Aug 3 09:07:20 2005 > To: Michael.Dillon(a)btradianz.com > Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: Your router/switch may be less secure than you think > From: "Robert E.Seastrom" <rs(a)seastrom.com> > Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 09:58:53 -0400 > > > > Michael.Dillon(a)btradianz.com writes: > > > We should all be looking to the security auditing work done by > > the OpenBSD team for an example of how systems can be > > cleaned up, fixed, and locked down if there is a will to do so. > > Beer, unsupported assertions, and lack of rigorous audit methodology > can be blended together to make one's code more secure? That would seem to depend on the quality of the code _before_ the blending, no? As well as getting the proportions in the blend "just right". *grin* Seriously, _any_ approach "can" result in better/more secure code. It all depends on exactly _what_ is done. Some approaches for identifying and/or eliminating "problems" are more efficient and/or more effective than are alternative means. This does -not- mean that those are the "only" ways to get things done. Now, the _liklihood_ that any given approach "willresult in better/more secure code -- *that* is an entirely different question. :)

1 0

IOS new architechture will be more vulnerable?
by Joe Maimon 03 Aug '05

03 Aug '05

quotes from wired interview with Mike Lynn " WN: So this new version of the operating system that they're coming out with, that's in beta testing. Lynn: It's actually a better architecture ... but it will be less secure.... That's why I felt it was important to make the point now rather than sweep it under the rug. I think it's something that we can fix.... " " But at the same time, now that I think they already are, I will say it's not as bad as you probably think it is. Not yet ... because the version that makes this an unstoppable critical problem is not out yet. " What exactly does this mean?

4 3

RE: "Cisco gate" - Payload Versus Vector
by Randy Bush 03 Aug '05

03 Aug '05

very helpful analysis. some questions: even without stiffling the heap check via crashing_already (i.e. a 'fix' is developed for that weakness), is the 30-60 second window sufficient to do serious operational damage. i.e. what could an attacker do with a code injection with a mean life as short as 15-30 seconds? that seems a bit short for a direct routing injection of much worth. but how about a damping attack (flap the victim's route enough to cause everyone to damp them), or would mrai stiffle that? could it be used to cascade to a neighbor? i suppose that diverting the just the right 15-30 seconds of traffic could be profitable. secondly, is there reason not to believe that the attack vectors might be at layer two, mpls, as well as layer three, ip? i.e. the "internet-free core" gambit does not reduce exposure to this one? > The "bad guys" are discussing the issues and we should think long > and hard before we muzzle the "good guys". http://rip.psg.com/~randy/draft-ymbk-obscurity-00.txt is a bit old, but seems relevant. randy

4 3

SPF Loses Mindshare?
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 03 Aug '05

03 Aug '05

I don't want to seed a flaming napalm-laden e-mail exchange on the list with this, but I fugured the folks running networks who haven't seen this, probably should. There's an article by John Levine "SUBJ: line is the title) over on CircleID that might be intersting some folks in the e-mail authentication jihad: http://www.circleid.com/article/1157_0_1_0_C/ For your perusal. - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

2 1

Telecoms Struggle As FCC e911 Compliance Deadline Nears
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 03 Aug '05

03 Aug '05

Operationally relevent, methinks. W. David Gardner writes in TechWeb News: [snip] In the race to meet FCC emergency 911 (e911) requirements, two firms log some progress, while another seeks a waiver. Under pressure to meet the FCC mandate to activate 911 service by the end of the year, Vonage and Telecommunication Systems (TCS) said Tuesday they will send VoIP E911 kits to provide vital communication information to thousands of Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs) beginning in mid-August. At the same time, Nextel has informed the FCC that it would seek a waiver from the FCC mandate that 95 percent of handsets be in compliance with location pinpointing regulations by Dec. 31, the Reuters news agency reported Monday. Nextel said 70 percent of its customers phone will be in compliance by the deadline, but it could take as much as two more years for the FCC goal to be fully met. [snip] http://www.techweb.com/wire/networking/167100209 - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

RE: "Cisco gate" and "Meet the Fed" at Defcon....
by Chris Ranch 02 Aug '05

02 Aug '05

Hi Randy, > > I might be wrong, but I thought an image with IPv6 support required > > 16 MB flash on the 2500? > > could be. don't care. don't need ipv6 on terminal servers > for oob access. But the vulnerability applies for only ipv6-enabled devices... http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20050729-ipv6.shtml Why don't you care? Chris

3 3

Re: "Cisco gate" and "Meet the Fed" at Defcon....
by Randy Bush 02 Aug '05

02 Aug '05

> I forget who suggested it actually, i was first, but others have followed > but I like the request to move this to cisco-nsp. Any reason > that isn't a better place than NANOG at this stage? i would guess that, if useful discussion is started on cisco-nsp, that the momentum will move there and attenuate here. but, imiho, shutting folk down here first is not a useful social path. randy

1 0

[Administrivia]: Please end this Thread: RE: "Cisco gate" and "Me et the Fed" at Defcon....
by Malayter, Christopher 02 Aug '05

02 Aug '05

Good Morning, Perhaps Susan was not clear enough yesterday. The mailing list administrative committee would request that you allow this thread to stop. It has certainly outlived its operational usefulness. I am now reiterating that request. Regards, Chris Malayter NANOG Mailing List Administration Team > -----Original Message----- > From: Geo. [mailto:geoincidents@nls.net] > Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 1:10 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: RE: "Cisco gate" and "Meet the Fed" at Defcon.... > > > > >> ok so your issue is totally irrelvant to the recent "ciscogate" > >> paranoia? > > That would depend on what other exploits cisco has slipstream > patched wouldn't it? (honest question as I don't know but it > would be nice if cisco would clarify the situation) > > Geo. > > George Roettger > Netlink Services >

4 3

Lynn Interview
by Crist Clark 02 Aug '05

02 Aug '05

Haven't seen Furgie post this one yet (may have missed it deleting some of the noise in those threads, though). Wired's interview with Mike Lynn. His side of the story, timeline, and motives for the rather climatic ending for what should have been a rather routine Black Hat presentation: http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,68365,00.html -- Crist J. Clark crist.clark(a)globalstar.com Globalstar Communications (408) 933-4387

1 0