Re: the future of SNMP
"David T. Perkins" <[email protected]> Mon, 03 Mar 2003 11:01:15 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.eos |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
HI, The design pattern as described below by Wes is one of my favorite "anti-patterns". That is, it is an example of what not to do! In specific, and very limited usage situations, it works. But, there are others where it is a disaster. For example, how does one "backup and restore" the configuration via SNMP? At 10:27 AM 3/3/2003 -0800, Wes Hardaker wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:51:24 -0800 (PST), "B. Levin" <[email protected]> said: > >>> Which security >>> precautions must be follwoed sending bulk responses >>> to a noAuthNoPriv request? which are acceptable for >>> an authPriv response? Can they be mixed into the >>> same buffer? > >B> I don't have answers to those questions. I would >B> welcome advice in making the mib more secure by those >B> who are better qualified in the area of security. > >FYI, You might look at the DISMAN-EVENT-MIB or the DISMAN-SCRIPT-MIB >(and probably others) which access internal agent objects by using the >same security mechanisms that were used to create the activation row >or object in the table in question. IE, before the data was shipped >via ftp it must be gathered. When gathered, it is gathered using the >same secName and secLevel as the original configuration object was set >using. > >(this creates some problems, but it seems to be a commonly-in-use >practice still). > >-- >Wes Hardaker >Network Associates Laboratories Regards, /david t. perkins