Feeds

Apple skewered over missing DNS patch

Users in a BIND

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

Apple has come under fire for failing to patch the critical Domain Name System (DNS) flaw which prompted a (rest of) industry wide response earlier this month.

For anyone just back from a trip up the Amazon, the discovery of a domain spoofing vulnerability by security researcher Dan Kaminsky sparked a massive patching effort that began on 8 July. Dozens of vendors - including Microsoft, Cisco, Ubuntu and the Internet Systems Consortium, which maintains BIND - released updates that mitigated against the risk of cache poisoning attacks, which stem from security shortcomings in the protocol itself rather than coding errors.

Kaminsky withheld details of the vulnerability in the internet's look up system, but the information soon leaked out through the efforts of other security researchers, prompting the confirmation of the nature of the flaw. Calls to update systems intensified after hackers developed exploits targeting the flaw. Successful exploitation of the flaw allows hackers to redirect surfers to potentially malicious websites, while the users have no idea that they are not in fact hooked up to their intended.

Patches are yet to arrive more than two weeks after the first warning of the vulnerability, sparking criticism from sections of the security community and Apple watchers (such as tidBITS here). The absence of a patch is most relevant for systems featuring Mac OS X server for domain name resolution.

Apple's software developers have clearly been very busy of late - not least with the launch of version 2 of the iPhone software, the Mac store and the .Mac-to-MobileMe migration.

Mac OS X servers use BIND, one of the most popular DNS implementations, patches for which were available as soon as Kaminsky published his initial alert. Porting the fix ought to be an easy enough job, but Apple is yet to get around to it. Meanwhile, the DNS flaw has become the target of active exploitation by hackers.

A blog posting by security tools firm Arbor Networks charts an increase in DNS "misuse" activity, such as a 49.8 per cent increase in single packet DNS version queries. Such queries, although they also have legitimate uses, potentially allow hackers to identify systems running older (vulnerable) software packages. Arbor has also uncovered persuasive (if not conclusive) evidence of an upsurge in cache poisoning attacks. ®

New hybrid storage solutions

More from The Register

next story
Google recommends pronounceable passwords
Super Chrome goes into battle with Mr Mxyzptlk
Infosec geniuses hack a Canon PRINTER and install DOOM
Internet of Stuff securo-cockups strike yet again
Reddit wipes clean leaked celeb nudie pics, tells users to zip it
Now we've had all THAT TRAFFIC, we 'deplore' this theft
Apple Pay is a tidy payday for Apple with 0.15% cut, sources say
Cupertino slurps 15 cents from every $100 purchase
YouTube, Amazon and Yahoo! caught in malvertising mess
Cisco says 'Kyle and Stan' attack is spreading through compromised ad networks
TorrentLocker unpicked: Crypto coding shocker defeats extortionists
Lousy XOR opens door into which victims can shove a foot
Hackers pop Brazil newspaper to root home routers
Step One: try default passwords. Step Two: Repeat Step One until success
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
Top 5 reasons to deploy VMware with Tegile
Data demand and the rise of virtualization is challenging IT teams to deliver storage performance, scalability and capacity that can keep up, while maximizing efficiency.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops
Balancing user privacy and privileged access, in accordance with compliance frameworks and legislation. Evaluating any potential remote control choice.