On CBS MoneyWatch: Best Ways to Lose 20 Pounds
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

July 29th, 2008

DNS cache poisoning attacks exploited in the wild

Posted by Dancho Danchev @ 3:24 am

Categories: Arbitrary Code Execution, Black Hat, Browsers, Exploit code, Hackers, Malware, Metasploit, Passwords, Phishing, Spyware and Adware

Tags: Security, DNS Cache Poisoning, DNS Rebinding Attacks, Pharming, IP Spoofing, Dancho Danchev

UPDATE: Arbor Networks have provided more details in their “30 Days of DNS Attack Activity” analysis, SANS confirmed HD Moore’s statement on DNS cache poisoned AT&T DNS servers. Numerous independent sources are starting to see evidence of DNS cache poisoning attempts on their local networks, inDNS Cache Poisoning Test what appears to be an attempt to take advantage of the “recent” DNS cache poisoning vulnerability :

” client 143.215.143.11 query (cache) ‘www.ebay.com/ANY/IN’ denied: 31
Time(s)
client 143.215.143.11 query (cache) ‘www.facebook.com/ANY/IN’
denied: 30 Time(s)
client 143.215.143.11 query (cache) ‘www.gmail.com/ANY/IN’ denied:
30 Time(s)
client 143.215.143.11 query (cache) ‘www.google.com/ANY/IN’ denied:
30 Time(s)
client 143.215.143.11 query (cache) ‘www.live.com/ANY/IN’ denied: 30
Time(s)
client 143.215.143.11 query (cache) ‘www.microsoft.com/ANY/IN’
denied: 30 Time(s)
client 143.215.143.11 query (cache) ‘www.msn.com/ANY/IN’ denied: 30
Time(s)
client 143.215.143.11 query (cache) ‘www.myspace.com/ANY/IN’ denied:
30 Time(s)”

Surprised? I’m not, since this was pretty logical given that the three publicly available exploits have been downloaded over 15,000 times in the last couple of days. What I’m actually surprised of is that it took so long to produce a working exploit, and the despite the media outbreak raising awareness on the potential for abuse, major international and local ISPs remain vulnerable. Ironically, remain vulnerable just like they’ve always been even though patches for a particular vulnerability were available. Insecure and misconfigured DNS servers were, and continue to be a realistic threat even in a Web 2.0 world.

Take for instance a survey of DNS security conducted back in 2004, showing that :

“We next examine which names depend on nameservers with known security flaws. Of the 166771 nameservers, 27141 have known vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities affect 185802 names. A naive expectation might be that, with ~17% vulnerable nameservers, only 17% of the names would be affected. This is patently not the case; transitive trust relationships “poison” every path that passes through an insecure nameserver. Hence 34% of DNS names can be compromised by launching well-known, scripted attacks.

Another DNS measurement study conducted back in 2005, showed that 84% of Internet name servers could be vulnerable to pharming attacks. Even if you’re more conservative than you should be, you can easily consider that at least 50% of Internet name servers remain vulnerable three years later. Well, that seems to be the case according to last year’s survey of DNS security, again conducted by Infoblox :

Still more than 50% of Internet name servers allow recursive queries, which is consistent with 2006 results. Accepting recursive queries from arbitrary addresses allows servers to be used in DNS amplification attacks that can bring down major networks, and also leaves them vulnerable to cache poisoning attacks. The percentage of name servers that allowed us to transfer zones actually increased slightly, from 29% to 31%. While this change is probably within the survey’s margin of error, it does show that this aspect of security isn’t improving. A change in the default behavior of the BIND 9 name server (like the change to the default recursion setting introduced in BIND 9.4) might help here.”

State of IP SpoofingMoreover, the MIT’s IP Spoofer project originally running since 2005, continues to automatically generate graphs representing the state of DNS servers security across the globe, particularly their susceptibility to IP spoofing, the ABC of DNS security. Despite the hype over the recent vulnerability, DNS cache poisoning has been around for years, and it’s not going away anytime soon.

Most importantly, malicious attackers don’t need to take advantage of this flaw to successfully commit cybercrime like they do on a daily basis. What hasn’t been taken care of for years, wouldn’t be solved in a matter of days, that’s for sure. Until then, take control of the situation, check whether or not your ISP is running DNS servers susceptible to cache poisoning, approach them in between sharing your evidence online, and consider going through the possible abuse scenarios malicious attackers can take advantage of using DNS cache poisoning.

Dancho DanchevDancho Danchev is an independent security consultant and cyber threats analyst, with extensive experience in open source intelligence gathering, malware and cybercrime incident response. He's been an active security blogger since 2007, and maintains a popular security blog. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.

Email Dancho Danchev

Subscribe to Zero Day via Email alerts or RSS.

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 54 Talkback(s)
This is exactly what I am wondering!...
Yikes can't even describe my emotions on the subject. But I need an education on this, I will admit!!... (Read the rest)
Posted by: JCitizen Posted on: 07/31/08 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
My W2k server and SuSE 10.2...  bjbrock | 07/29/08
My 11.0 openSuSE automatically patched BIND last week  D-T-Schmitz | 07/29/08
Wrong place  CreepinJesus | 07/29/08
I guess if you're running an Apple server...  bjbrock | 07/29/08
Even more dangerous if you are using an OS X client!  NonZealot | 07/29/08
Unless Apple Software Update uses hashes  thorman@... | 07/30/08
Nahhhh...  Mach5RR | 07/30/08
Why not patch?  deowll | 07/29/08
For the big servers, it's not about "updates"  seanferd | 07/29/08
Is https still safe?  NonZealot | 07/29/08
If the "bad guys" produce a certificate...  bjbrock | 07/29/08
Explain!!  techboy_z | 07/29/08
Here's a couple of ways...  bmerc | 07/29/08
@JCitizen below and bmerc  NonZealot | 07/29/08
I suspected that Kaminsky's discussion ....  JCitizen | 07/31/08
If the CA is in your root store....  bjbrock | 07/29/08
Yes, but is it relevant?  NonZealot | 07/29/08
A certificate is tied to a URL.  bjbrock | 07/29/08
Point by point  NonZealot | 07/29/08
How do you think people get fooled by phishing?  bjbrock | 07/29/08
I don't think so  NonZealot | 07/29/08
@NonZealot  JCitizen | 07/29/08
Make sure your DNS server is patched, then  seanferd | 07/29/08
What if the DNS and OpenSSL issues were released together?  nmcfeters | 07/29/08
I believe the word I'm looking for here is, "Yikes."  seanferd | 07/30/08
This is exactly what I am wondering!...  JCitizen | 07/31/08
Well, for one  nmcfeters | 07/29/08
RE: DNS cache poisoning attacks exploited in the wild  jamalystic | 07/29/08
Yep.  seanferd | 07/29/08
RE: DNS cache poisoning attacks exploited in the wild  obelanger@... | 07/29/08
Picture and Phrase... oh please!  PrimeRisk | 07/29/08
Google and Yahoo -- hmm related?  daengbo | 07/29/08
Enough of the DNS poisoning ....  The Rationalist | 07/29/08
Plenty useful.  bjbrock | 07/29/08
They lose? Think again. YOU lose!  NonZealot | 07/29/08
NonZealot I agree with you...  RicD_ | 07/29/08
Your correct. We all loose in this case.  phatkat | 07/29/08
Uh, what if your ISP hasn't patched?  seanferd | 07/29/08
How to know my ISP is patched ?  Web Smart | 07/30/08
Check it here, my friend. happy  seanferd | 07/30/08
RE: DNS cache poisoning attacks exploited in the wild  kurt.hengst@... | 07/29/08
It isn't like the problem can't be fixed.  deowll | 07/29/08
We really should thank the "Security Expert" that...  BitTwiddler | 07/29/08
pffft  ZDNET_guest666 | 07/29/08
This is not completely true  nmcfeters | 07/29/08
Oddly enough I don't think he did.  deowll | 07/29/08
Precisely...hence the public exposure! ..(NT)  JCitizen | 07/29/08
The department of homeland security...  JCitizen | 07/29/08
Microcosm of the larger problem  seanferd | 07/29/08
For sure; thanks for the link seanferd...  JCitizen | 07/31/08
LOL. "Don't make me come down there..." grin  seanferd | 07/31/08
Criminal  leeegeee | 07/29/08
You'll need to be careful with #1  Owen3.141 | 07/30/08
 PrimeRisk | 07/29/08

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
Click Here

Recent Entries

advertisement
Click Here

Archives

Favorite Links

ZDNet Blogs

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here