\nAlthough the standard was designed to put Cisco hardware in compliance with EU directives, it has apparently been adopted by a number of other hardware makers. The presentation, described in detail<\/a> by Dark Reading, describes how its reliance on SNMPv3, creates a variety of options for attack. For example, the protocol was initially vulnerable to a brute force attacks on its authentication system; although Cisco has patched that flaw, there’s no way to determine how many unpatched machines remain in the wild.\n<\/p>\n \nSNMP also defaults to operating over UDP, and it’s relatively easy to spoof things like the source address and port for that protocol. It’s possible to use TCP instead, and even limit the addresses that can access the hardware, but the protocol doesn’t specify either of these. Communications aren’t encrypted by default, and the system won’t notify administrators when a trace is activated or disabled, meaning that hackers could potentially set up or eliminate surveillance without anyone being aware of it.\n<\/p>\n \nThe IBM researcher, Tom Cross, notified Cisco of the issues back in December, and recommends revisions to the standard that will ensure that it is more secure by default. That might be helpful, but it still wouldn’t deal with the problems posed by unpatched systems—Cross himself apparently recognizes that network administrators can be hesitant to risk the disruption of service that may come with updating major pieces of equipment.\n<\/p>\n