Maybe OT: Network ethics

From: Tothwolf <tothwolf_at_concentric.net>
Date: Sun Feb 3 01:20:19 2002

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Jeffrey S. Sharp wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
>
> > For some ultra-secure type site, wiring the other two pairs to detect a
> > connection, and or to deliver 48VDC (from a spare telephone switch
> > supply) would deter all but the most determined.
>
> Or even have it so that unused RJ45 wall jacks are wired to a nearby
> electric outlet. "Oh, you plugged into one of our proprietary power
> ports...".

Well, I wouldn't want to go that far, as it would likely electrocute
anyone who happened to touch the other end of the cable plugged into the
jack. 48VDC across some TX/RX pins would still certainly take the NIC for
a thrill ride, and it would likely loose its magic smoke in the process.
I'd think that would be enough of an incentive for all but the most
determined intruder to not try it again.

> Or use (or invent, if they do not exist) wall jack panels that have a
> lockable metal door.

Locking covers are available for Leviton "Decra style" receptacles, and
there are "Decra style" keystone plates available. There are several
problems in implementing this idea however. Those locking covers are both
ugly, and expensive, and it is also quite likely they would end up being
left unlocked anyway.

IMHO, the best way to avoid this kind of problem is to not install RJ45
jacks in insecure areas in the first place. The next best way to avoid
this kind of problem is to disconnect the jack completely, or at the very
least, restrict what can be done via a connection to the jack.

-Toth
Received on Sun Feb 03 2002 - 01:20:19 GMT