On Mon, 19 May 2003, Jamal Hadi wrote: > I dont think the hashes are similar - its the effect into the > slow path. I was told by someone who tested this on a priicey CISCO > that they simply die unless capable of a feature called CEF. Yes, but pretty much nobody is using Cisco without CEF, except in the last mile, low-end devices. > On Mon, 19 May 2003, David S. Miller wrote: > > > From: Jamal Hadi <hadi@shell.cyberus.ca> > > Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 21:23:08 -0400 (EDT) > > > > Also used to attack CISCOs by them kiddies btw. We stand much better > > than any CISCO doing caching. > > > > I have to assume that the source address selection operates > > differently for attacking cisco equiptment, our hashes being > > identical would really be unbelievable :-) > > > > > > > - > : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
