Timeline for Can a DDoS attack yield any information?

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

6 events

when toggle format	what		by	license	comment
Aug 12, 2016 at 21:58	comment	added	H. Idden		@BenVoigt Even if you might be right by exact word, people would draw the wrong conclusions from it (that their network is safe from others being able to capture the traffic between other machines). Even today about only enterprise network devices (>1000$) have monitoring/counter meassures to MAC flooding attacks.
Aug 12, 2016 at 20:17	comment	added	Ben Voigt		@H.Idden: When people say "eavesdrop", they're referring to a passive attack. The switch makes that impossible. The attack is not prevented, but it now requires an active component (which additionally makes it much easier to detect and trace the culprit)
Aug 11, 2016 at 10:26	comment	added	H. Idden		@immibis you are right, but many didn't think about MAC address spoofing. So it was a common myth that you can't eavesdrop a network when using a switch instead of a hub and it was regularly told as security meassurement. Similar that a modem or subnet is a firewall replacement because of NAT (IPv6 doesn't have NAT and will allow un-firewalled access to those devices or UDP source spoofing is possible with most NAT-devices) or that it is enough to escape quotes on userinput on websites to be safe but this still allows certain SQL-injection attacks (why not use parameterized queries?) or XSS.
Aug 11, 2016 at 9:50	history	edited	H. Idden	CC BY-SA 3.0	deleted 1 character in body
Aug 11, 2016 at 4:27	comment	added	Criticizing Israel not allowed		"In earlier times switches where used in networks to prevent machines to listen to the communication between 2 other machines." - I would hope that wasn't the intention, just a somewhat handy side effect. MAC address spoofing will also help you listen to the communication between 2 other machines.
Aug 10, 2016 at 14:35	history	answered	H. Idden	CC BY-SA 3.0