Re: DNS cache poisoning - am I safe if I limit recursion to trusted local networks?

2022-01-04 Thread Ray Bellis




On 04/01/2022 21:12, Grant Taylor via bind-users wrote:


Yep.  This is where I have settled.  But I don't feel I can defend
it when asked.  Hence my seeking to better understand.


There are categories of bugs that specifically affect recursion, and in
BIND these are _much_ more common than those that affect authoritative
service.   Adding auth service barely touches the attack surface.

And with BIND's separation between authoritative and recursively cached
trees there is (AFAIK) no risk of cache pollution affecting the
authoritative data.

Furthermore, having the auth data for your own zones present there 
actually ensures that your own zones' data:


1.  will always be served in preference to cached data

2.  will be fresher (i.e. not subject to TTLs) assuming that
NOTIFYs and/or a short SOA refresh is in place

3.  will be present if access to the authoritatives is lost
for some period of time (/me waves at Facebook!)

I really can't see any downside.

Ray

___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. 
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.


bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users


Re: DNS cache poisoning - am I safe if I limit recursion to trusted local networks?

2022-01-04 Thread Grant Taylor via bind-users

On 1/4/22 4:37 AM, Ray Bellis wrote:
Better yet, use BIND's mirror zones feature so that the zone is also 
DNSSEC validated.


Completely agreed.  I think the type of authoritative information is 
somewhat independent of the fact that any authoritative information exists.


IMHO, the strictures against running authoritative and recursive on the 
same server seem to get mis-applied a lot of the time.  I think it's 
perfectly fine for an *internal* recursive server to also hold 
authoritative copies of your own zones.


Yep.  This is where I have settled.  But I don't feel I can defend it 
when asked.  Hence my seeking to better understand.




--
Grant. . . .
unix || die



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. 
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.


bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users


Re: How to show run the active configuration on bind

2022-01-04 Thread Ray Bellis




On 04/01/2022 16:53, Mik J via bind-users wrote:

Hello,

How can I check which variables are loaded in memory and considered as 
active.


For example, I would like to check that the value of lame-ttl is 0
In my named.conf configuration file I have
include "myconf.conf";
lame-ttl 600;

And in the myconf.conf file I have
lame-ttl 0;

So how can I make sure which value is used ?


You can't do that - BIND prohibits redeclaration of individual options,

It also prohibits the presence of more than one "options { }" block.

Ray


___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. 
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.


bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users


How to show run the active configuration on bind

2022-01-04 Thread Mik J via bind-users
Hello,
How can I check which variables are loaded in memory and considered as active.
For example, I would like to check that the value of lame-ttl is 0In my 
named.conf configuration file I haveinclude "myconf.conf";
lame-ttl 600;
And in the myconf.conf file I havelame-ttl 0;

So how can I make sure which value is used ?

Thank you
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. 
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.


bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users


Re: DNS cache poisoning - am I safe if I limit recursion to trusted local networks?

2022-01-04 Thread Ray Bellis



On 04/01/2022 03:52, Grant Taylor via bind-users wrote:

If I'm allowing recursion and authoritative on the same server, I'd have 
the recursive + authoritative server do secondary zone transfers off of 
the internal MS-DNS / AD server.  That way the clients can get the info 
off of the first server they talk to.


To me, the secondary copy of the zone is a form of authoritative 
information on the otherwise recursive server.


Better yet, use BIND's mirror zones feature so that the zone is also 
DNSSEC validated.


IMHO, the strictures against running authoritative and recursive on the 
same server seem to get mis-applied a lot of the time.  I think it's 
perfectly fine for an *internal* recursive server to also hold 
authoritative copies of your own zones.


Ray

___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. 
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.


bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users