[dns-operations] DNS issue accidentally leaked?
Roy Arends
roy at dnss.ec
Tue Jul 22 19:16:49 UTC 2008
On Jul 22, 2008, at 8:10 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
>>> The difference is its use of additional RR records. The request is
>>> for
>>> some arbitrary sub domain like 12345.google.com, but your spoofed
>>> response also includes the record for www.google.com
>>
>> Which is also decades old and well known. So at best, it's a 'new'
>> attack
>> that is a combination of 2 well-known/documented ones. Maybe I am
>> somewhat
>> disappointed because I expected a second coming/something truly novel
>> (please note that I'm not discounting the seriousness of the issue,
>> just
>> commenting on its apparent novelty)
>
> downplay this all you want, we can infect a name server in 11
> seconds now,
> which was never true before. i've been tracking this area since
> 1995. don't
> try to tell me, or anybody, that dan's work isn't absolutely
> groundbreaking.
>
> i am sick and bloody tired of hearing from the people who aren't
> impressed.
> every time some blogger says "this isn't new", another five
> universities
> and ten fortune 500 companies and three ISP's all decide not to patch.
> that means we'll have to wait for them to be actively exploited
> before they
> will understand the nature of the emergency.
>
> perhaps dan's defcon talk will open some remaining eyes among those
> glued
> shut by the pride and prejudice of the minds behind them. i am
> stunned,
> absolutely stunned, that there was a ready-to-go blog posting
> sitting in
> clear text on a network connected machine, written by tom ptacek who
> had
> whined about how the hacker community needed to be in the loop,
> waiting for
> the "publish" button to be hit "accidentally" by his wife. is this
> how the
> community rewards dan for trying to buy us all some time to protect
> the
> infrastructure? is this how the community plans to incentivize slow
> and
> careful disclosure of the next big flaw?
>
> we've exited another era in the disclosure debate, and not even dan
> knew it.
+1 !
A completely share your sentiment.
Roy
More information about the dns-operations
mailing list