Cisco's SecurityThreat

Cisco (NASDAQ: CRISCO) is a world-renowned internet datagram fragmentation and fermentation internet entrepreneurship. If you're wondering what all that means, it basically states one thing: They make what powers your internet receptacle. Every portion of the internet is divided up into separate segments - called "ethernets," that link a group of people. The blacks have their Ebonics ethernet, illegible to the rest of us; the French have their own ethernet network used for pornographic images of hairy, unshaven women; and so on. Each of these individual ethernets are divided up into smaller local ethernets, until finally, one ethernet is split up amongst two personal computers.

Now, you may be thinking that these ethernets must be linked somehow - but how? I mean, we can still access the Ebonics ethernet, right? The answer, of course, is yes. Whom we have to thank for this immense intermingling of seemingly parallel cultures is very clear. The connections are due entirely to Cisco Systems, the sole manufacturer of Internet routers, which power the very backbone of the Web. Internet routers are a very complex concept to understand, but hopefully, with the basic and coherent examples I will lay before you this evening, you should have a clear understanding of exactly what they do.

Internet routers, in their most jejune form, link the individual ethernets together. Sounds simple enough, but there's much more to it. You can't just "plug in" the "cords" from each ethernet network (called 'fiber-optic cables' because of their light emissions when used in fireworks). Rather, the router must handle what we in the business call "crossover" - that is, the transmissions of IP datagrams from one ethernet to another. To do this, it implies a series of 'resistors' and 'amplifiers' to dynamically modify the datagrams' contents as they are being sent over the line. Thus, the router will automatically slow down, to the level of 25 words per minute, datagrams going into the Ebonics ethernet; automatically speed up, to a human-readable level, datagrams coming from the Ebonics ethernet; and automatically deleting any datagrams coming from any French porn site.

Now that you know exactly what a router does, the original article should seem much clearer to you now than ever before. These exploits allow a hacker to take down any backbone router in existence today, even going to the extreme, as the article mentions, of crash[ing] storage routers. This would essentially prohibit the free exchange of information that the internet was founded upon, dividing it up into separate cults of culture.

Fortunately, if any good news amounted from this story at all, it's that Cisco did, in fact, release a patch for this. As soon as the backbone providers upgrade their service packs, the internet shall once again remain united as one. Suburban America will still be able to receive their NBA scores, and Harlem will still be able to see the NHL standings. Moreover, all offending nude women datagrams from France will continue to be rejected. Thanks again, Cisco.

	hackers wouldnt do that (none / 0) (#1)
	by PotatoError on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 01:33:43 PM PST

	why would hackers want to "prohibit the free exchange of information that the internet was founded upon?". This is the goal of the US government and the New World Order - a goal which hackers oppose. <<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

	Yeah, right. (none / 0) (#2)
	by Yoshi on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 02:01:58 PM PST

	Yeah, it's just not like hackers to prohibit the opinions of others.

	protest (none / 0) (#14)
	by PotatoError on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 07:17:06 PM PST

	Thats not harming the internet - thats a protest attack at a site. In all respect that site wouldnt have gone down if they spent the time securing it properly. I dont agree with the attack anyway. It probably was a lone person with knowledge who did it. Not a hacker group. There's a general consensus that hackers wont harm the internet - it would be stupid to harm the thing they are trying to advance. <<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

	uhhh, yeah (none / 0) (#3)
	by Anonymous Reader on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 02:38:14 PM PST

	Every portion of the internet is divided up into separate segments - called "ethernets," that link a group of people. More Each of these individual ethernets are divided up into smaller local ethernets, until finally, one ethernet is split up amongst two personal computers. Every portion of the Internet is divided into WANs, MANs, LANs, subnets, blah blah blah. Not everyone uses Ethernet. Some people still insist on token ring for various systems. Others still use a bus topology. Ethernet is the type of communication used on the network (simplified for children). Subnets would be a more intelligent and accurate term. The connections are due entirely to Cisco Systems, the sole manufacturer of Internet routers, which power the very backbone of the Web. Not quite You can't just "plug in" the "cords" from each ethernet network (called 'fiber-optic cables' because of their light emissions when used in fireworks). Rather, the router must handle what we in the business call "crossover" - that is, the transmissions of IP datagrams from one ethernet to another. Not all routers are meant for use with fiber optics. Not even Internet routers. And a crossover is a Category5 (CAT5) cable (not fiber optic) with wires 1 and3, 2 and 6 switched) and it isn't required. Thus, the router will automatically slow down, to the level of 25 words per minute, datagrams going into the Ebonics ethernet; automatically speed up, to a human-readable level, datagrams coming from the Ebonics ethernet; and automatically deleting any datagrams coming from any French porn site. Transmission of information is by nits not WPM. A router will not block anything unless you include a filter. Nothing about blocking network traffic is done automatically. Also niether AOL nor Microsoft are backbone operators (not providers). And example of a backbone operators would be the NSF or vBNS.

	Au contraire. (none / 0) (#4)
	by tkatchev on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 03:02:11 PM PST

	The only nits here are ones posting inane messages. I can guess you weren't mommy's favorite child. Were you punished much when you were a kiddie? -- Peace and much love...

	here's my interpretation: (none / 0) (#6)
	by nathan on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 05:07:41 PM PST

	Advocates advocate because they believe it to have a point; either it is good of itself or it accomplishes something good. If it is considered good of itself, that implies that advocates see advocacy as a sort of duty, as something benefitting the world; to preach the merits of gkery, in other words, is to do good for yourself regardless of how it is taken by others. If advocacy is good because it brings about other goods, then it must be considered good because it brings about either its aim or ancillary goals. Let us first consider the aim of advocacy. As it is directed outward, it must be attempting to enhance the prestige of gks to others, or to make others gks. In any case, for advocacy to be considered as bringing about goods, it must be considered an effective technique. Advocacy has succeeded in making gkhood a popular "alternative lifestyle" among the young; however, this type of advocacy is not canonical because it is lifestyle advocacy rather than technical advocacy. Advocacy has succeeded only in making people in certain circles fear censure if they don't act gky enough; it has accomplished very little in terms of spreading knowledge, its public justification. To an extent, therefore, the advocacy-praxis has been a succes. The only primary ancillary goal of advocacy is to make the gk appear fearsome, that he may not be easily beaten, and advocacy has thoroughly failed in that respect (as evinced by continued gk displeasure with adolescent athletes.) Gk advocacy has largely been a failure in bringing about an adoption of gk views in the general public. Despite its troubling liberalist tendencies, the body politic nevertheless has refused to increase its adoption of atheistic, materialistic, technologically-fetishistic, post-Enlightenment non-philosophical technocracy as a result of anything that gks have had to say (although this may prove false in the long run, as gkdom is now an established pseudo-legitimate "alternative lifestyle.") In addition, the utter failures of assorted Lunix companies, and the failure of the general public to accept gk demeanour and deportment, are heartening to those opposed with their whole selves to gkdom. The only explanation for the continued practice of advocacy, then, is that gks largely view it as justified in its own right - good of itself. As only actions serving to magnify the self, others, the State, and God can be good of themselves, and as the glorification of the self is clearly the only such end that gk advocacy serves - as advocacy is thus evidence that gks worship themselves and, hence, the Devil - gks must be viewed as a dangerous force for the subversion of virtue among vulnerable individuals. They are deeply unhealthful and, though we are obliged to help them, we must be prepared to save ourselves if they become too gky for us to help them any longer. Nathan "I.K." -- Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

	retarded? (none / 0) (#5)
	by Yoshi on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 03:59:03 PM PST

	Every portion of the Internet is divided into WANs, MANs, LANs, subnets, blah blah blah. Wrong. You can divide up an ethernet segment however you want to when it reaches you, but the centralized information segments are spread out among the different ethernets. Not everyone uses Ethernet. Some people still insist on token ring for various systems. Others still use a bus topology. Like I said, after your own local ethernet reaches you from your backbone, you can split it up however you want. You're still connecting to your backbone's ethernet though. Ethernet is the type of communication used on the network (simplified for children). Subnets would be a more intelligent and accurate term. Kind of. Each ethernet is divided up throughout the world, eventually being linked by larger ethernets until it finally reaches one ethernet, connecting Microsoft with AOL. Not all routers are meant for use with fiber optics. They'd have to be for it to be used. All of the ethernets are connected nowadays with highly combustable fiberoptical cable. And a crossover is a Category5 (CAT5) cable (not fiber optic) with wires 1 and3, 2 and 6 switched) and it isn't required. Your facts are wrong. "Crossover" is the term used for the process of sending data from one ethernet to another. Every internet router acts as a "crossover hub" for connecting the datagrams from one ethernet to another, even at the most rudimentary level. Transmission of information is by nits not WPM. My 3COM modem lists its speed as 56.6 words per minute down, and 33.6 words per minute up. A router will not block anything unless you include a filter. Nothing about blocking network traffic is done automatically. Oh, I get it, you're trolling. How else do you think we are protected from the repulsive content on the Internet? Also niether AOL nor Microsoft are backbone operators (not providers). And example of a backbone operators would be the NSF or vBNS. Give me a break. Since when did AOL or Microsoft just give up their backbone status? It sounds absurd for them to do so, it makes no business sense. Please, do yourself a favor and read up on routers and the internet before replying again.

	Research (none / 0) (#12)
	by Anonymous Reader on Sun Feb 3rd, 2002 at 02:24:53 PM PST

	Ethernet The most widely used local area network (LAN) access method, defined by the IEEE as the 802.3 standard. Ethernet has become so popular that a specification for "LAN connection" or "network card" generally implies Ethernet without saying so. All Macs and many PCs come with 10/100 Ethernet ports for home use, not just to create a small home network, but to connect to the Internet via a DSL or cable modem, which requires it. A 10/100 port means that it supports both 10BaseT at 10 megabits per second (Mbps) and 100BaseT at 100 Mbps. Ethernet is normally a shared media LAN. All stations on the segment share the total bandwidth, which is either 10 Mbps (Ethernet), 100 Mbps (Fast Ethernet) or 1000 Mbps (Gigabit Ethernet). With switched Ethernet, each sender and receiver pair have the full bandwidth. Twisted pair Ethernet (10BaseT) uses economical telephone wiring and standard RJ-45 connectors, often taking advantage of installed wires in a building. It is wired in a star configuration and requires a hub or switch. Fast Ethernet (100BaseT) is similar, but uses two different twisted pair configurations (see 100BaseT). Today's Ethernet network adapters, hubs and switches generally support both 10BaseT and 100BaseT (10/100) and automatically sense and adapt to the transmitted speed. The earlier versions of 10 Mbps Ethernet used coaxial cable (see 10Base5 and 10Base2). Fiber-optic Ethernet (10BaseF and 100BaseFX) is impervious to external radiation and is often used to extend Ethernet segments up to 1.2 miles. Specifications exist for complete fiber-optic networks as well as backbone implementations. FOIRL (Fiber-Optic Repeater Link) was an earlier standard that is limited to .6 miles distance. Ethernet transmits variable length frames from 72 to 1518 bytes in length, each containing a header with the addresses of the source and destination stations and a trailer that contains error correction data. Higher-level protocols, such as IP and IPX, fragment long messages into the frame size required by the Ethernet network being employed (see MTU). Ethernet uses the CSMA/CD technology to broadcast each frame onto the physical medium (wire, fiber, etc.). All stations attached to the Ethernet are "listening," and the station with the matching destination address accepts the frame and checks for errors. Ethernet is a data link protocol (MAC layer protocol) and functions at layers 1 and 2 of the OSI model. Ethernet was invented by Robert Metcalfe and David Boggs at Xerox PARC in 1973, which first ran at 2.94 Mbps. Metcalfe later joined Digital where he facilitated a joint venture between Digital, Intel and Xerox to collaborate further on Ethernet. Version 1 was finalized in 1980, and products shipped in the following year. In 1983, the IEEE approved the Ethernet 802.3 standard. See 100BaseT, Gigabit Ethernet, 10 Gigabit Ethernet and switched Ethernet.

	Hi NAWL! (none / 0) (#7)
	by RobotSlave on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 05:35:19 PM PST

	Did you read shoeboy's latest article? Pretty neat, huh? Well, anyway, nice to have you back! Nothing livens things up around here like stodgy, point-by-point, copyright-violating, reactionary rebuttals! You may not reproduce this comment, in whole or in part, without written permission of the author. © RobotSlave, 2002 © 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

	Red rags, etc (none / 0) (#13)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 08:37:23 AM PST

	You may not reproduce this comment [...] in part Oh yes I may, in order to critique it. Speaking of which, I notice you have not yet realised the difference between NAWL and Yoshi's imaginary friends, who also post line-by-line rebuttals.

	But What About...? (none / 0) (#8)
	by doofus on Sun Feb 3rd, 2002 at 01:02:44 AM PST

	What about IP packet circuit switching using ATM over Token Ring ethernet? And does the CARNIVORE backbone connect before or after the French porn ethernet?

	Quite simple. (none / 0) (#9)
	by Yoshi on Sun Feb 3rd, 2002 at 01:39:18 AM PST

	What about IP packet circuit switching using ATM over Token Ring ethernet? What about it? It's a special technology that Chase, Fleet, Key Bank and other major banks employ to connect their PIN numbers together. That way, you can extract your money from anywhere with only a small surcharge. And does the CARNIVORE backbone connect before or after the French porn ethernet? At the risk of putting our nation's security in jeopardy, I can only tell you that it a small portion of carnivore is deployed on every aspect of ethernet routing.

	little correction (none / 0) (#11)
	by Anonymous Reader on Sun Feb 3rd, 2002 at 01:55:35 PM PST

	Transmission of information is by nits not WPM I think you mean BITS not NITS. I guess I can let it go since the N and B keys are so close together. But you really should proof read.

	One thing (none / 0) (#10)
	by Anonymous Reader on Sun Feb 3rd, 2002 at 02:41:23 AM PST

	You haven't told a word about a very important (I think) fact that cast a strange light, or should I say shadow, on all security problems on the Internet : Cisco routers are based on open sauce hackers tools I do hope that, with your encyclopedic knowledge of these matters, you will enlighten me about that point (a point that makes me shiver).