[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080911110633.67b7a5e7@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 11:06:33 +0200
From: Tomas Hoger <thoger@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: coley@...us.mitre.org
Subject: Re: CVE Request (ruby -- DNS spoofing vulnerability
in resolv.rb)
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 12:01:04 -0400 (EDT) "Steven M. Christey"
<coley@...us.mitre.org> wrote:
> > The transaction IDs are assigned in sequential (n+1 order) and the
> > source ports are always the same.
>
> Use CVE-2008-3905, to be filled in soon.
>
> We're treating this as a distinct issue because this is *REALLY* bad
> randomness within a particular implementation, besides the inherent
> limitation of DNS when source ports are fixed.
Applying this rule, separate id should probably be used for PyDNS [1]
[2] and adns [3] as well, at they both suffer from the similar flaws -
use predictable transactions ids and source port.
PyDNS should be fixed as of upstream version 2.3.2 [4], adns issue is
rather considered a design decision as documented in the INSTALL file
[5].
[1] http://pydns.sourceforge.net/
[2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=490217
[3] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=492698
[4]
http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/p/python-dns/python-dns_2.3.3-1/changelog
[5] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=492698#15
--
Tomas Hoger / Red Hat Security Response Team
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
