Content Overview This module defines
the potential vulnerabilities related to VLANs within a network
and possible solutions. Topics include port security for
mitigation of MAC spoofing and flooding, using PVLANs and VACLs
to control VLAN traffic, VLAN hopping, DHCP spoofing, ARP
spoofing, and STP attacks. You learn about many potential
problems and solutions; in particular, you learn how to secure
switch access using vty ACLs and implementing SSH.
Content
8.1 Understanding Switch Security Issues
8.1.1 Overview of Switch Security Concerns A lot of
industry attention dwells on security attacks from outside the
walls of an organization and at the upper Open Systems
Interconnection (OSI) layers. Network security often focuses on
edge-routing devices and on filtering packets based on Layer 3
and 4 headers, ports, and stateful packet inspection. This
includes all issues surrounding Layer 3 and above as traffic
makes its way into the campus network from the Internet.
Generally, most security discussions do not consider campus
access devices and Layer 2 communication. The default state of
networking equipment highlights this focus on external
protection and internal open communication. Firewalls are
placed at the organizational borders and default to a secure
operational mode, allowing no communication until configured to
do so. The default operational mode for routers and switches
placed internal to an organization is to accommodate
communication and forward all traffic, which often results in
minimal security configuration and renders them targets for
malicious attacks. If an attack is launched at Layer 2 on an
internal campus device, the rest of the network can be quickly
compromised, often without detection. Many security features
are available for switches and routers, but they must be
enabled to be effective. As with Layer 3, where security had to
be tightened on devices within the campus as malicious activity
increased, security measures must now be taken to guard against
malicious activity at Layer 2. A new security focus centers on
attacks launched by maliciously leveraging normal Layer 2
switch operations. Security features exist to protect switches
and Layer 2 operations but, as with access control lists (ACLs)
for upper-layer security, a policy must be established and
appropriate features configured to protect against potential
malicious acts while maintaining daily network operations.
Content 8.1 Understanding Switch Security
Issues 8.1.2 Describing Unauthorized Access by
Rogue Devices Rogue access comes in several forms. For
example, because unauthorized rogue access points are
inexpensive and readily available, employees sometimes plug
them into existing LANs and build ad hoc wireless networks
without IT department knowledge or consent. These rogue access
points can be a serious breach of network security because they
can be plugged into a network port behind the corporate
firewall. Employees generally do not enable any security
settings on the rogue access point, so it is easy for
unauthorized users to use the access point to intercept network
traffic and hijack client sessions. Malicious rogue access
points, while much less common than employee-installed ones,
present an even greater risk and challenge because they are
intentionally hidden from physical and network view. These
rogue access points create an unsecured wireless LAN connection
that puts the entire wired network at risk. Another security
threat is rogue Layer 2 switches. An attacker with physical
access to data cabling attaches a rogue switch that can be used
to manipulate Spanning Tree Protocol (STP), hop VLANs, sniff
traffic, and so on. This rogue switch can be a workstation with
the ability to trunk and participate in other Layer 2
operations. To mitigate STP manipulation, use the root
guard and BPDU guard enhancement commands to enforce
the placement of the root bridge in the network and the STP
domain borders. The STP BPDU guard allows network designers to
keep the active network topology predictable. While BPDU guard
may seem unnecessary given that the administrator can set the
bridge priority to zero, there is still no guarantee that the
bridge will be elected as the root bridge because there might
be another bridge with priority zero and a lower bridge ID.
BPDU guard is best deployed toward user-facing ports to prevent
rogue switch network extensions by an attacker.
Content
8.1 Understanding Switch Security Issues
8.1.3 Switch Attack Categories Layer 2 malicious
attacks are typically launched by a device connected to the
campus network. This can be a physical rogue device placed on
the network or an external intrusion that takes control of and
launches attacks from a trusted device. In either case, the
network sees all traffic as originating from a legitimate
connected device. The following lists the types of attacks
launched against switches and Layer 2: - MAC layer
attacks
- VLAN attacks
- Spoof attacks
- Switch device attacks
Figure describes attack
methods and mitigation steps.
Content 8.1
Understanding Switch Security Issues 8.1.4
Describing a MAC Flooding Attack A common Layer 2 or switch
attack is MAC flooding, which causes a switch’s CAM table to
overflow, resulting in flooding regular data frames out all
switch ports. This attack can be launched to collect a broad
sample of traffic or as a denial of service (DoS) attack. A
switch’s CAM tables are limited and, therefore, can contain
only a limited number of entries at any one time. A network
intruder can maliciously flood a switch with a large number of
frames from a range of invalid source MAC addresses. If enough
new entries are made before old ones expire, new valid entries
are not accepted. Then, when traffic arrives at the switch for
a legitimate device that is located on one of the switch ports
that was not able to create a CAM table entry, the switch must
flood frames to that address out all ports. This has two
adverse effects: - Switch traffic forwarding is
inefficient and voluminous.
- An intruding device can be
connected to any switch port and capture traffic not normally
seen on that port.
If the attack is launched before
the beginning of the day, the CAM table in the switches would
be full. As the majority of legitimate end devices are powered
up, their source MAC addresses would not be entered into the
CAM tables. If this represents a large number of network
devices, the number of MAC addresses for which traffic will be
flooded is high, and switch ports will carry flooded frames
from a large number of devices. If the initial flood of invalid
CAM table entries is a one-time event, the switch eventually
ages out older, invalid CAM table entries, allowing new,
legitimate devices to create an entry. Traffic flooding will
cease and may never be detected, while the intruder captured a
significant amount of data from the network. Figure shows the
progression of a MAC flooding attack. To mitigate against MAC
flooding, port security is configured to define the number of
MAC addresses that are allowed on a given port. Port security
can also specify which MAC address is allowed on a given port.
Content 8.1 Understanding Switch Security
Issues 8.1.5 Describing Port Security
Cisco Catalyst switches include port security as a feature.
Port security restricts a switch port to a specific set or
number of MAC addresses. Those addresses can be learned
dynamically or configured statically. The port then provides
access only to frames from those addresses. If, however, the
number of addresses is limited to four but no specific MAC
addresses are configured, the port allows any four MAC
addresses to be learned dynamically, and port access is then
limited to those four dynamically learned addresses. A port
security feature called “sticky learning,” which is available
on some switch platforms, combines the features of dynamically