SecurityFocus

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)

> "it's not like this hasn't been reported, and fixed, many times by many
> others" - so if it's fixed so many times, how come it was still vulnerable,
> and ISC had to issue their patches?

Because its just a 16-bit field. DNS is broken. Cache poisoning will
happen. Those are the facts on the ground. The only argument left
is the degree of brokenness.

> -Amit

Tim Newsham
http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/

[ reply ]

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 27 2007 04:37PM
Tim (tim-security sentinelchicken org)

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)