Feeds

Security bug stalls new dot-word TLD land grab AGAIN

ICANN's domain explosion backfires, fizzles out

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

Domain name overlord ICANN has been forced to delay its new top-level domain (TLD) expansion by another week as its techies attempt to analyse the fallout of an embarrassing security vulnerability.

Its TLD Application System (TAS), which companies worldwide have been using since January to confidentially apply for gTLDs such as .gay, .london and .blog, has now been down for 10 days due to a bug that enabled some applicants to see information belonging to others.

While ICANN maintains that it has fixed the problem, it now says that it needs at least another week to sift through its mountains of TAS logs, in order to figure out which applicants' data was visible to which other applicants.

ICANN had been receiving reports about the bug since at least 19 March, but only pulled the plug on 12 April, just 12 hours before the final application submission deadline, when it realised how serious the problem could be.

It initially hoped to get the system back up and running by 17 April, but when that deadline passed it then promised to give users an update on the timing by Friday 20 April.

However, that update, which arrived over the weekend, merely promised to provide yet another update before the end of Friday 27 April.

"No later than 27 April 2012 we will provide an update on the reopening of the system and the publication of the applied-for new domain names," chief operating officer Akram Atallah said.

While ICANN is declining interview requests from the media, it did publish a video interview between its head of media relations and chief security officer Jeff "The Dark Tangent" Moss on Friday, which explained some of the technical details of the vulnerability.

"Under certain circumstances that were hard to replicate users that had previously deleted files could end up seeing file names of users that had uploaded a file," Moss said. "Certain data was being revealed to users that were not seeking data, it was just showing up on their screen."

Moss confirmed that no outside attackers had access to data, and that the contents of the compromised files were not accessible by anyone but the applicant to which they belonged.

Nevertheless, the file names themselves could have proven valuable. Most gTLD applications have been filed secretly, without public announcement, in order to reduce the risk of competing applications being filed for the same strings.

Due to the way ICANN's new gTLD programme is structured, a "contention set" of two or more conflicting applications could wind up in an auction. This has pressed the need for confidentiality on most applicants.

Because many companies uploaded files to TAS named after the gTLD string being applied for, confidential information may therefore have been compromised.

While no claims of foul play have yet been made, ICANN is promising to fully disclose – at least to the applicants themselves – whose data was viewable by whom.

"We’re putting everyone on notice: we know what file names and user names were displayed to what people who were logged in and when," Moss said. "We want to do this very publicly because we want to prevent any monkey business. We are able to reconstruct what file names and user names were displayed."

The delay in reopening TAS has not been well-received by some applicants.

"My advice to ICANN now: get your skates on!" said Stephane Van Gelder, general manager of the domain name registrar Indom, in an editorial on CircleID.

"Stop faffing about trying to verify every single bit of applicant data that may have been impacted by the glitch," Van Gelder, who is also chair of ICANN's influential GNSO Council policy body, added. "ICANN's next update... should be: 'in the interest of getting the new gTLD program back on track, we've decided to restart TAS now.'"

The organisation currently plans to reopen TAS for five business days before the final filing deadline, which now appears to mean 4 May at the earliest – 20 days late. As a consequence, its planned 30 April Reveal Day, when it publishes the applications for public comment, has been postponed. ®

Security for virtualized datacentres

More from The Register

next story
TEEN RAMPAGE: Kids in iPhone 6 'Will it bend' YouTube 'prank'
iPhones bent in Norwich? As if the place wasn't weird enough
Consumers agree to give up first-born child for free Wi-Fi – survey
This Herod network's ace – but crap reception in bullrushes
Crouching tiger, FAST ASLEEP dragon: Smugglers can't shift iPhone 6s
China's grey market reports 'sluggish' sales of Apple mobe
Sea-Me-We 5 construction starts
New sub cable to go live 2016
New EU digi-commish struggles with concepts of net neutrality
Oettinger all about the infrastructure – but not big on substance
PEAK IPV4? Global IPv6 traffic is growing, DDoS dying, says Akamai
First time the cache network has seen drop in use of 32-bit-wide IP addresses
EE coughs to BROKEN data usage metrics BLUNDER that short-changes customers
Carrier apologises for 'inflated' measurements cockup
Comcast: Help, help, FCC. Netflix and pals are EXTORTIONISTS
The others guys are being mean so therefore ... monopoly all good, yeah?
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
The next step in data security
With recent increased privacy concerns and computers becoming more powerful, the chance of hackers being able to crack smaller-sized RSA keys increases.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.