Item — HN Reader

if somebody wants to sue a layer 2 ethernet fabric chip maker they're insane. any asshole can use a switch to do any sort of terrible thing with their nation's internet infrastructure.

it's like suing intel because they made the 1GbE NIC in a server seized for kiddie porn.

1 comments

Not if they backdoored it for money to aid nation-states in I.P. theft or murder of innocents. I'm not saying I recall above companies doing that. Just that it's one legit reason among many to sue or bring charges against a telecoms, semiconductor company. And we know more than one vendor that previously did exactly that.

Show me any documentation whatsoever that proves a pure layer 2 Ethernet switch has been put on a test network and observed (via packet capture on its upstream) sending data home.

It's not the switch itself. It's the I.P. in the switches. And you've narrowed the situation enough to ensure nobody could meet your criteria unless representing the most wreckless spies on Earth.

Note: One fun fact of layer 2 Ethernet is it's insecure enough by itself that many just tap straight into the lines somewhere. Led to development of MACsec standard.

Not at all. "Put a suspicious device on an internet connection, let it run, and capture all packets to see where it phones home" is a fairly basic process.

The connectors in TAO catalog use RF to make that impossible without unusual spectrum analyzers. I did that, too. Another trick is covert channels to make it invisible in network traffic. Covert channel analysis is mandated in high assurance specs but almost nobody does it.

Anyway, you're not going to see a switch subverted by pro's in action. They won't blow that cover. They'll use it to facilitate a normal attack and plant evidence it came through a normal vector. That's how subversion works at pro level.