nanog mailing list archives
Re: CISCO 0-day exploits
From: Justin Wilson <lists () mtin net>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 13:50:27 -0500
I really thought that more Cisco devices were deployed among NANOG. I guess that these devices are not used anymore or maybe that I understood wrong the severity of this CVE.
A proper network design helps to mitigate flaws like this. If you have CDP off, which many people do, then this exploit is not that big of a deal to you. If your devices are on a management network then it’s not that big of a deal. Just because a certain vendor has vulnerabilities exposed doesn’t it’s an all hand on deck scenario. Many of the folks on NANOG have a good grasp of network design. Sure, some don’t. But for the most part they do. Justin Wilson lists () mtin net — https://j2sw.com - All things jsw (AS209109) https://blog.j2sw.com - Podcast and Blog
Current thread:
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits, (continued)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits Jean | ddostest.me via NANOG (Feb 10)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits Tom Hill (Feb 10)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits Ahmed Borno (Feb 10)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits Saku Ytti (Feb 11)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits Harlan Stenn (Feb 11)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits Ahmed Borno (Feb 11)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits Saku Ytti (Feb 11)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits Ahmed Borno (Feb 11)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits sronan (Feb 11)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits Justin Wilson (Feb 10)
- Re: CISCO 0-day exploits Tom Hill (Feb 10)