With the recent Garland Technology and TOYOTech technical partnership, there will literally be no packets left behind in the network world. Garland’s line of Network TAPs provides complete packet visibility, from the simplest to the most complex network installations. Our parent company TOYO Corp built the first packet capture system capable of supporting rates of up to 100Gbps with no packet loss. This combined solution provides a robust solution for network professionals where packet analysis is the mantra.
Garland provides the medium for packets while TOYO offers the collection mechanism. See and Record every bit, every byte, and packet.®
This is a proven partnership by TOYO in APAC. Being part of the Garland ecosystem provides immediate key benefits to our respective customers and channel partners:
On October 4, 2018, Bloomberg Businessweek revisited a hardware hack that had long lasting ramifications for our national security and the trust between an appliance server vendor and its customers. This “hack” affected the world’s biggest companies and triggered the beginning of the end of one major server supplier. More recently, subsequent articles suggest not all parties are in agreement of the findings and ramifications, and the vendors and targeted companies are demanding that the article be retracted. So, a dilemma. Who are we to believe? From a network engineering perspective, we need to practice due diligence and perform our own research.

Although the jury is still out on whether the original article is totally factual, it did bring to light how a major server vendor may have been infiltrated by a hacking arm of a certain government. The vendor’s servers were highly regarded in the industry. They were purchased and deployed in large numbers by well-known high-tech companies needing video compression for media intensive applications. Through sleuth and deception, a “grain-of-rice” sized electronic component was amended into the vendor’s numerous motherboard designs. This component was programmed to push malicious code into host server’s circuitry and then send inconspicuous pings to rogue servers for further instruction. Not until a few of the customers performed their due diligence with detailed hardware security analysis did the problem surface. Findings were reviewed internally and also shared with the US government. From there you can imagine the events that followed. Accusations were made followed recently by denials. It affected not just how companies deployed and evaluate new technology from any vendor but caused mistrust between vendor and clients.
How can a network engineer prove or disprove the breach? Let’s start with the simple traffic characteristic – low number of pings from the server to unknown destinations. The traffic rates generated were so low that they were deemed anomalies and not worth the investigative effort. A TopN monitoring tool that list bandwidth hogs would not have registered or made it visible at all. However, a solution that provided full packet visibility and capture capacity would have recorded all traffic, which would then be made available for detailed investigation.
Even if an IDS/IPS is in place but is configured to only record suspect traffic, the data would have been missed. With a Garland installation, all traffic being sent to an IDS/IPS may be mirrored automatically to a network recorder like SYNESIS. Unlike the IDS/IPS, the SYNESIS would record all traffic which can then be made available and investigated in detail. Packets provide the most detailed documentation that can prove or disprove the event ever happened.
Sometimes, you don’t know what you don’t know. Your company’s reputation may even hang in the balance based on the findings Garland and SYNESIS is a powerful, unique solution that allows teams to fully investigate what they don’t know. Every bit, byte, and packet® is seen and recorded leaving nothing to chance.
[Want to learn the benefits of TAP vs SPAN? Check out our white paper TAP vs SPAN: Real Network Visualization.]
If the inline security tool goes off-line, the TAP will bypass the tool and automatically keep the link flowing. The Bypass TAP does this by sending heartbeat packets to the inline security tool. As long as the inline security tool is on-line, the heartbeat packets will be returned to the TAP, and the link traffic will continue to flow through the inline security tool.
If the heartbeat packets are not returned to the TAP (indicating that the inline security tool has gone off-line), the TAP will automatically 'bypass' the inline security tool and keep the link traffic flowing. The TAP also removes the heartbeat packets before sending the network traffic back onto the critical link.
While the TAP is in bypass mode, it continues to send heartbeat packets out to the inline security tool so that once the tool is back on-line, it will begin returning the heartbeat packets back to the TAP indicating that the tool is ready to go back to work. The TAP will then direct the network traffic back through the inline security tool along with the heartbeat packets placing the tool back inline.
Some of you may have noticed a flaw in the logic behind this solution! You say, “What if the TAP should fail because it is also in-line? Then the link will also fail!” The TAP would now be considered a point of failure. That is a good catch – but in our blog on Bypass vs. Failsafe, I explained that if a TAP were to fail or lose power, it must provide failsafe protection to the link it is attached to. So our network TAP will go into Failsafe mode keeping the link flowing.
Single point of failure: a risk to an IT network if one part of the system brings down a larger part of the entire system.
Heartbeat packet: a soft detection technology that monitors the health of inline appliances. Read the heartbeat packet blog here.
Critical link: the connection between two or more network devices or appliances that if the connection fails then the network is disrupted.