Re: ifconfig down (was Re: Recording slow scans

Henry Hertz Hobbit (hhhobbiticarus.weber.edu)
Sat, 10 Oct 1998 19:58:37 -0600 (MDT)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Next message: mjdinteraxon.gr: "choke router choice"
• Previous message: Kevin Sullivan: "Firewall Science Project"
• Next in thread: Radovan Semancik: "Re: ifconfig down (was Re: Recording slow scans"
• Reply: Radovan Semancik: "Re: ifconfig down (was Re: Recording slow scans"

On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Rob Quinn wrote:

> > Btw, in the past people have often commented about attempts to cut the
> > transmit ethernet cable. This is usually so that a host is "invisible"
> > to others at the ethernet level.
>
> On my Solaris2.6 boxs I can still snoop an interface when it's marked
> down. Is ifconfig down sufficient to stop me from transmitting?

At the IP (Network layer) the answer is yes. At the Ethernet
(Logical Link Layer) the answer is no. I assume you mean anything
being transmitted, so the answer is ifconfig is NOT sufficient
to stop you from tranmitting. You see, bootp for diskless Suns
requires an ethernet broadcast to work, and the IP address isn't
even known. The ethernet is at the hardware level and is not
completely controllable by software. Snip away...

HHH

• Next message: mjdinteraxon.gr: "choke router choice"
• Previous message: Kevin Sullivan: "Firewall Science Project"
• Next in thread: Radovan Semancik: "Re: ifconfig down (was Re: Recording slow scans"
• Reply: Radovan Semancik: "Re: ifconfig down (was Re: Recording slow scans"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Jul 17 1999 - 07:11:56 CDT