Excessive NSEC3 iterations cause high CPU load during insecure delegation validation
If a BIND resolver is performing DNSSEC validation and encounters a maliciously crafted zone, the resolver may consume excessive CPU. Authoritative-only servers are generally unaffected, although there are circumstances where authoritative servers may make recursive queries (see: https://kb.isc.org/docs/why-does-my-authoritative-server-make-recursive-queries).
This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.16.50, 9.18.0 through 9.18.46, 9.20.0 through 9.20.20, 9.21.0 through 9.21.19, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.16.50-S1, 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.46-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.20-S1.
Under certain circumstances, BIND is too lenient when accepting records from answers, allowing an attacker to inject forged data into the cache.
This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.16.50, 9.18.0 through 9.18.39, 9.20.0 through 9.20.13, 9.21.0 through 9.21.12, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.16.50-S1, 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.39-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.13-S1.
Querying for records within a specially crafted zone containing certain malformed DNSKEY records can lead to CPU exhaustion.
This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.39, 9.20.0 through 9.20.13, 9.21.0 through 9.21.12, 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.39-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.13-S1.
Alta · CVSS 7.5EPSS 15,84%Sin corrección publicada
Many records in the additional section cause CPU exhaustion
It is possible to construct a zone such that some queries to it will generate responses containing numerous records in the Additional section. An attacker sending many such queries can cause either the authoritative server itself or an independent resolver to use disproportionate resources processing the queries. Zones will usually need to have been deliberately crafted to attack this exposure.
This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.11.37, 9.16.0 through 9.16.50, 9.18.0 through 9.18.32, 9.20.0 through 9.20.4, 9.21.0 through 9.21.3, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.11.37-S1, 9.16.8-S1 through 9.16.50-S1, and 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.32-S1.
If a server hosts a zone containing a "KEY" Resource Record, or a resolver DNSSEC-validates a "KEY" Resource Record from a DNSSEC-signed domain in cache, a client can exhaust resolver CPU resources by sending a stream of SIG(0) signed requests.
This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.0.0 through 9.11.37, 9.16.0 through 9.16.50, 9.18.0 through 9.18.27, 9.19.0 through 9.19.24, 9.9.3-S1 through 9.11.37-S1, 9.16.8-S1 through 9.16.49-S1, and 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.27-S1.
BIND's database will be slow if a very large number of RRs exist at the same name
Resolver caches and authoritative zone databases that hold significant numbers of RRs for the same hostname (of any RTYPE) can suffer from degraded performance as content is being added or updated, and also when handling client queries for this name.
This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.11.37, 9.16.0 through 9.16.50, 9.18.0 through 9.18.27, 9.19.0 through 9.19.24, 9.11.4-S1 through 9.11.37-S1, 9.16.8-S1 through 9.16.50-S1, and 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.27-S1.
The Closest Encloser Proof aspect of the DNS protocol (in RFC 5155 when RFC 9276 guidance is skipped) allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption for SHA-1 computations) via DNSSEC responses in a random subdomain attack, aka the "NSEC3" issue. The RFC 5155 specification implies that an algorithm must perform thousands of iterations of a hash function in certain situations.
Certain DNSSEC aspects of the DNS protocol (in RFC 4033, 4034, 4035, 6840, and related RFCs) allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) via one or more DNSSEC responses, aka the "KeyTrap" issue. One of the concerns is that, when there is a zone with many DNSKEY and RRSIG records, the protocol specification implies that an algorithm must evaluate all combinations of DNSKEY and RRSIG records.
Parsing large DNS messages may cause excessive CPU load
The DNS message parsing code in `named` includes a section whose computational complexity is overly high. It does not cause problems for typical DNS traffic, but crafted queries and responses may cause excessive CPU load on the affected `named` instance by exploiting this flaw. This issue affects both authoritative servers and recursive resolvers.
This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.0.0 through 9.16.45, 9.18.0 through 9.18.21, 9.19.0 through 9.19.19, 9.9.3-S1 through 9.11.37-S1, 9.16.8-S1 through 9.16.45-S1, and 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.21-S1.
A stack exhaustion flaw in control channel code may cause named to terminate unexpectedly
The code that processes control channel messages sent to `named` calls certain functions recursively during packet parsing. Recursion depth is only limited by the maximum accepted packet size; depending on the environment, this may cause the packet-parsing code to run out of available stack memory, causing `named` to terminate unexpectedly. Since each incoming control channel message is fully parsed before its contents are authenticated, exploiting this flaw does not require the attacker to hold a valid RNDC key; only network access to the control channel's configured TCP port is necessary.
This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.2.0 through 9.1
named's configured cache size limit can be significantly exceeded
Every `named` instance configured to run as a recursive resolver maintains a cache database holding the responses to the queries it has recently sent to authoritative servers. The size limit for that cache database can be configured using the `max-cache-size` statement in the configuration file; it defaults to 90% of the total amount of memory available on the host. When the size of the cache reaches 7/8 of the configured limit, a cache-cleaning algorithm starts to remove expired and/or least-recently used RRsets from the cache, to keep memory use below the configured limit.
It has been discovered that the effectiveness of the cache-cleaning
Media · CVSS 6.5EPSS 3,45%Sin corrección publicada
Update policies krb5-subdomain and ms-subdomain do not enforce controls promised in their documentation
To provide fine-grained controls over the ability to use Dynamic DNS (DDNS) to update records in a zone, BIND 9 provides a feature called update-policy. Various rules can be configured to limit the types of updates that can be performed by a client, depending on the key used when sending the update request. Unfortunately, some rule types were not initially documented, and when documentation for them was added to the Administrator Reference Manual (ARM) in change #3112, the language that was added to the ARM at that time incorrectly described the behavior of two rule types, krb5-subdomain and ms-subdomain. This incorrect documentation could mi