|
BugTraq
Re: "BIND 9 DNS Cache Poisoning" by Amit Klein (Trusteer) Jul 24 2007 05:40PM securityfocus networkontap com (2 replies) Re: "BIND 9 DNS Cache Poisoning" by Amit Klein (Trusteer) Jul 24 2007 08:18PM Jamie Riden (jamie riden gmail com) (2 replies) Re: "BIND 9 DNS Cache Poisoning" by Amit Klein (Trusteer) Jul 27 2007 04:40AM Gadi Evron (ge linuxbox org) (2 replies) Re: "BIND 9 DNS Cache Poisoning" by Amit Klein (Trusteer) Jul 27 2007 07:19PM Amit Klein (aksecurity gmail com) (1 replies) Re: "BIND 9 DNS Cache Poisoning" by Amit Klein (Trusteer) Jul 27 2007 06:54PM Tim Newsham (newsham lava net) (1 replies) Re: "BIND 9 DNS Cache Poisoning" by Amit Klein (Trusteer) Jul 27 2007 10:34PM Amit Klein (aksecurity gmail com) Re: "BIND 9 DNS Cache Poisoning" by Amit Klein (Trusteer) Jul 26 2007 10:50PM Theo de Raadt (deraadt cvs openbsd org) Re: "BIND 9 DNS Cache Poisoning" by Amit Klein (Trusteer) Jul 24 2007 08:07PM Amit Klein (aksecurity gmail com) |
|
|
Privacy Statement |
> This is Paul Vixie's response on this, when I asked him for verification:
>
> -----
> this bug has been reported over and over again for a dozen years. it's
> odd to have to keep fixing it-- i fixed it in bind4 and bind8 when theo
> de raadt offered me his random number generator to use. bind9 should've
> used that same one but apparently didn't. note that with this fix, the
> difficulty in poisoning someone's cache rises from "a few tens of seconds"
> to "a few minutes". it's a 16-bit field. not a lot of room for
> randomness or unpredictability. only DNSSEC, a protocol change, fixes
> this problem, which is fundamentally a protocol problem. but since folks
> just won't leave it alone and keep on reporting it year after decade, we
> will keep on improving our random number generator for this dinky little
> 16-bit field. i just wish the reporters wouldn't be so smarmy and self
> congradulatory about it. it's not like this hasn't been reported, and
> fixed, many times by many others.
> -----
Note that this conveniently ignores the option to use randomized port
numbers... No, it is a pretty fix, but it sure does help.
tim
[ reply ]