BIND8: Multiple vulnerabilities

Posted Nov 24, 2002 14:08 UTC (Sun) by stock (subscriber, #5849) [Link]

Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 07:17:41 +0100 (CET)
From: Robert M. Stockmann <stock@stokkie.net>
To: jon@lasser.org
Subject: simple bind 9.2.1 example

Hi,

I just read your article

"Caught in a BIND"
http://theregister.co.uk/content/55/28235.html

Where you state the following :

"
If you're saddled with an old version, take heart. With the latest security
holes, the programs are vulnerable only when acting as recursive name
servers. In brief, this means that the holes only affect servers that can
look up any address on the Internet. Your name servers should not respond to
such requests from external addresses anyway: to do so opens the door to DNS
cache poisoning attacks. Your name servers should respond only to
authoritative requests from outside your network, and allow recursion only
within the network.

Sadly, most BIND configurations will allow recursion from any address --
that's the default configuration of BIND, another situation that the Internet
Software Consortium should resolve.

When the Internet was designed, nobody imagined swarms of thousands of
six-foot-tall jet-black stealth woodpeckers. Today they're here, and it's
time our architects took the woodpeckers into account.
"

Well allthough i agree with you, here's a example where DNS admins with
basic skills could easily generate and figure out how to make their
setups secure :

http://crashrecovery.org/named/

Your conclusion which states transitioning to bind 9 is painfull is IMHO
not true, but merely a matter of having accessable documentation with
usefull examples.

cheers,

Robert
--
Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE
Network Engineer - UNIX Consultant
crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net
========================================================================
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:41:49 -0500
From: J. Lasser <jon@lasser.org>
To: Robert M. Stockmann <stock@stokkie.net>
Subject: Re: simple bind 9.2.1 example

In the wise words of Robert M. Stockmann:

> Your conclusion which states transitioning to bind 9 is painfull is IMHO
> not true, but merely a matter of having accessable documentation with
> usefull examples.

It's painful for ISPs, like the one I worked at with 10,000 zone
records. Each of which was broken.

It's also painful if you have only ten or twenty zone records with
various errors and not a lot of time.

Thanks for your note --- it's always good to hear from readers!
Jon
--
Jon Lasser
Home: jon@lasser.org | Work:jon@cluestickconsulting.com
http://www.tux.org/~lasser/ | http://www.cluestickconsulting.com
Buy my book, _Think_Unix_! http://www.tux.org/~lasser/think-unix/