North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: how to protect name servers against cache corruption

  • From: Ben Black
  • Date: Tue Jul 29 22:16:42 1997 
i say again that although it cannot be made completely secure in the 
DNSSEC sense, it can absolutely be made far more resistant to some 
*known* attacks without significant code changes.


ben



On Tue, 29 Jul 1997, Paul A Vixie wrote:

> Let me put this another more interesting and more direct way.
> 
> Postulate a name server with the following properties:
> 
> 	1. Actually works on and is connected to the live Internet.
> 	2. RFC compliant except as nec'y to comply with #1 above.
> 	3. No DNSSEC, no TSIG, no SECUPD.
> 	4. Completely bug free.
> 
> You go right ahead and build that name server, and I will drive a truck,
> no, better still a bus or even a backhoe, right through its front window.
> 
> DNS is not secure and cannot be made so.  BIND-8.1.1 is the best there is,
> and it's what you should run, but as long as you run DNS without DNSSEC,
> your confidence level should be set accordingly.
> 
> PS:
> 
> BIND is definitely #1, is almost #2, is definitely #3, and trying to be #4.
>