> > > The attached plugin will supposedly block the interface of a CISCO > router vulnerable to the widely publicized vulnerability. I did not test > it, and I don't plan to officially include it (it's redundant with > cisco_ipv4_dos.nasl which is non-intrusive). As such, its description > should not be taken too seriously. but, then again, one of the problems with just relying on the snmp OS string, or in the case of 'banners', (smtp banners, netbios registry entries) is that we truly don't do the test. In the case of this one, yes, its a LOT more intrusive than say, just KILL_HOST (more like KILL_NET ;0) but should not it be included? I mean, there are those other cisco snmp DOS's that will KILL_NET and those are in the standard distribution.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jul 18 2003 - 12:05:58 PDT