NSA able to compromise Cisco, Juniper, Huawei switches

Warren Bailey wbailey at satelliteintelligencegroup.com
Tue Dec 31 23:04:00 UTC 2013

Explaining, not a denial written by their legal department. I find it
insanely difficult to believe cisco systems has a backdoor into some of
their product lines with no knowledge or participation. Given the fact
that RSA had a check cut for their participation (sell outs..), would it
be out of the realm of possibility cisco knowingly placed this into their
product line? And would it be their mistake to come out with a “we had no
idea!” rather than “guys with badges and court orders made us do it!”?

Google has some deniability, as their networks were compromised without
their knowledge. Placing code into a PC BIOS or IOS image is a far
different beast than asking a fiber provider to give a split to a
governmental agency. Secret squirrel wires with secret squirrel modulation
techniques isn’t a surprise to me, what is a surprise to me is the level
of acceptance the IT community has shown thus far on NANOG.

On a side note, I found it unbelievable the NSA was so pissed off about
aeronautical access being hard to capture. The initial article made it
seem like they had already gotten ahold of the data, which would have
really pissed me off. If it’s really that difficult, I have a NSA proof
satellite platform with capacity should anyone need it.. ;)


On 12/31/13, 12:34 PM, "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins at arbor.net> wrote:

>On Jan 1, 2014, at 2:16 AM, Warren Bailey
><wbailey at satelliteintelligencegroup.com> wrote:
>> Randy is right here.. Cisco has some Œsplainin to do - we buy these
>>devices as ³security appliances², not NSA rootkit gateways
>Roland Dobbins <rdobbins at arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>
>	  Luck is the residue of opportunity and design.
>		       -- John Milton

More information about the NANOG mailing list