Re: [arch-general] Bind 9.6.1-1 patched against dynamic update ddos?

2009-08-03 Thread K. Piche
On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 18:37 +0200, RedShift wrote:
 Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
  Hi,
  I've seen that there's a dynamic update ddos attack that is widely 
  available on the net and after looking for the solution it seems that 
  bind's latest patch (9.6.1-P1) solves this problem.
  
  So my question is more like this, is extra/bind 9.6.1-1 in the 
  repository the same as bind 9.6.1-P1?
  The build date of the current package in extra/ says the 18 July but the 
  homepage of BIND says the latest patch was published the 28 July.
  
  Best regards
  Fredrik Eriksson
  
  
 
 According to a commenter on the slashdot news article about this issue, this 
 should provide a temporary countermeasure:
 
 iptables -A INPUT -p udp --dport 53 -j DROP -m u32 --u32 '30270xF=5'
 
 haven't tested it myself though...

The current version 9.6.1.P1-1 in extra corrects the issue.

k


 Glenn
-- 
K. Piche kpi...@rogers.com



[arch-general] Bind 9.6.1-1 patched against dynamic update ddos?

2009-07-29 Thread Fredrik Eriksson

Hi,
I've seen that there's a dynamic update ddos attack that is widely 
available on the net and after looking for the solution it seems that 
bind's latest patch (9.6.1-P1) solves this problem.


So my question is more like this, is extra/bind 9.6.1-1 in the 
repository the same as bind 9.6.1-P1?
The build date of the current package in extra/ says the 18 July but the 
homepage of BIND says the latest patch was published the 28 July.


Best regards
Fredrik Eriksson


Re: [arch-general] Bind 9.6.1-1 patched against dynamic update ddos?

2009-07-29 Thread Damien Churchill
2009/7/29 Fredrik Eriksson fredrik.eriks...@gigabit.nu:
 Hi,
 I've seen that there's a dynamic update ddos attack that is widely available
 on the net and after looking for the solution it seems that bind's latest
 patch (9.6.1-P1) solves this problem.

 So my question is more like this, is extra/bind 9.6.1-1 in the repository
 the same as bind 9.6.1-P1?
 The build date of the current package in extra/ says the 18 July but the
 homepage of BIND says the latest patch was published the 28 July.

 Best regards
 Fredrik Eriksson


Judging by the Ubuntu package version it is P2 that fixes the current
ddos issue, not read too much into it though so I could be wrong.


Re: [arch-general] Bind 9.6.1-1 patched against dynamic update ddos?

2009-07-29 Thread Fredrik Eriksson

Damien Churchill skrev:

2009/7/29 Fredrik Eriksson fredrik.eriks...@gigabit.nu:
  

Hi,
I've seen that there's a dynamic update ddos attack that is widely available
on the net and after looking for the solution it seems that bind's latest
patch (9.6.1-P1) solves this problem.

So my question is more like this, is extra/bind 9.6.1-1 in the repository
the same as bind 9.6.1-P1?
The build date of the current package in extra/ says the 18 July but the
homepage of BIND says the latest patch was published the 28 July.

Best regards
Fredrik Eriksson




Judging by the Ubuntu package version it is P2 that fixes the current
ddos issue, not read too much into it though so I could be wrong.

  
I checked their mail sent (again just to be sure :P) to FD this morning. 
Their patches were for versions 9.3.2-2, 9.4.2 P2 and 9.5.0 P2.


Best regards
Fredrik Eriksson


Re: [arch-general] Bind 9.6.1-1 patched against dynamic update ddos?

2009-07-29 Thread RedShift

Fredrik Eriksson wrote:

Hi,
I've seen that there's a dynamic update ddos attack that is widely 
available on the net and after looking for the solution it seems that 
bind's latest patch (9.6.1-P1) solves this problem.


So my question is more like this, is extra/bind 9.6.1-1 in the 
repository the same as bind 9.6.1-P1?
The build date of the current package in extra/ says the 18 July but the 
homepage of BIND says the latest patch was published the 28 July.


Best regards
Fredrik Eriksson




According to a commenter on the slashdot news article about this issue, this 
should provide a temporary countermeasure:

iptables -A INPUT -p udp --dport 53 -j DROP -m u32 --u32 '30270xF=5'

haven't tested it myself though...


Glenn