<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic LAND Attack in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/land-attack/m-p/2146828#M358124</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Folks,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I try to launch a LAND Attack against my firewall ASA 5520. Everything will work fine. But why, I think it shoud not work. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I use a little tool where I can user a spoofed address, with a cluster shell and attack the firewall interface with the source of 127.0.0.1 ore the ip address of the interface as the source and destination. Then I get a cpu load of 89% with only two host. With IP tables I can use kernel processes to prevent this. But I don´t find anything for ASA&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG src="https://community.cisco.com/" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 01:29:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>dzimmi</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-12T01:29:10Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>LAND Attack</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/land-attack/m-p/2146828#M358124</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Folks,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I try to launch a LAND Attack against my firewall ASA 5520. Everything will work fine. But why, I think it shoud not work. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I use a little tool where I can user a spoofed address, with a cluster shell and attack the firewall interface with the source of 127.0.0.1 ore the ip address of the interface as the source and destination. Then I get a cpu load of 89% with only two host. With IP tables I can use kernel processes to prevent this. But I don´t find anything for ASA&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG src="https://community.cisco.com/" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 01:29:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/land-attack/m-p/2146828#M358124</guid>
      <dc:creator>dzimmi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-12T01:29:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>LAND Attack</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/land-attack/m-p/2146829#M358125</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P style="text-align: justify;"&gt;Hi Bro&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="text-align: justify;"&gt;LAND ATTACK is old news. I’m not surprise if your Cisco ASA is able to handle LAND ATTACKS well, which is a good news. The Cisco ASA receives a packet with the IP source address 127.0.0.1.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="text-align: justify;"&gt;There’s a another case on this, for your kind reference &lt;A _jive_internal="true" href="https://community.cisco.com/thread/226294"&gt;https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/226294&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2013 06:22:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/land-attack/m-p/2146829#M358125</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ramraj Sivagnanam Sivajanam</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-04-24T06:22:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

