| |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||
Cache poisoning vulnerability found in BINDCache poisoning vulnerability found in BINDPosted Jul 26, 2007 14:36 UTC (Thu) by jond (guest, #37669)In reply to: Cache poisoning vulnerability found in BIND by flewellyn Parent article: Cache poisoning vulnerability found in BIND
Isn't relying on an unpredictable source port a bit like relying on the current PID as an unguessable number? I.e. couldn't an attacker just forge 65,000-odd UDP packets, one per possible source address?
(Log in to post comments)
Cache poisoning vulnerability found in BIND Posted Jul 26, 2007 19:06 UTC (Thu) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] Not in a time-sensitive exploit like this one. Remember, cache-poisoning only works if the attacker's phony DNS reply can reach the querying machine prior to the legitimate one.
|
|||||||||||