On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 10:42 AM, WebDawg <[email protected]> wrote: > I posted this a while ago: > > > http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2016/Jan/77 > > http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2016/Mar/25
I see, but that has nothing to do with the security of the VLAN implementation, rather of the switch as a whole. That switch is certainly awful, but it's no reason to impugn the viability of using VLANs across the board. > Also, just because a vulnerability has not been reported or discovered, > does not mean it does not exist. Nor does it mean we avoid using an entire technology because there "might" be vulnerabilities in what has otherwise remained a stable and useful paradigm for decades. The question of VLAN jumping remains open, in my mind. An appropriate, well-configured switch fabric should have no problem carrying vastly different security levels in different VLANs, vulnerabilities in its management software notwithstanding. _______________________________________________ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
