Insecure DNS servers on PG infrastructure
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Insecure DNS servers on PG infrastructure |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26210.1216998123@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Insecure DNS servers on PG infrastructure
Re: Insecure DNS servers on PG infrastructure Re: Insecure DNS servers on PG infrastructure |
Список | pgsql-www |
I just noted that cvs.postgresql.org and svr1.postgresql.org are not running the latest bind release, which means that they are vulnerable to the DNS cache poisoning attack recently discovered by Dan Kaminsky. Vixie and co think this is a pretty big deal, so folks might want to update sooner rather than later.http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/800113 BTW, there is an excellent end-to-end test available for whether the security fix (port randomization) is actually working for you: dig @server-to-test porttest.dns-oarc.net in txt This takes a few seconds (they've arranged it to force multiple queries from the tested server) and gives you back a readout of how many ports those queries arrived from and the spread in the port addresses. A good result looks about like this: ;; ANSWER SECTION: porttest.dns-oarc.net. 60 IN CNAME z.y.x.w.v.u.t.s.r.q.p.o.n.m.l.k.j.i.h.g.f.e.d.c.b.a.pt.dns-oarc.net. z.y.x.w.v.u.t.s.r.q.p.o.n.m.l.k.j.i.h.g.f.e.d.c.b.a.pt.dns-oarc.net. 60 IN TXT "66.207.139.134 is GOOD: 26 queries in 2.3seconds from 26 ports with std dev 17102.06" If it says FAIR or POOR then you have an unpatched server or there is something interfering with the port randomization. If the server is behind a NAT firewall then the latter is entirely likely. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: