At Wed, 27 Aug 2008 00:13:03 -0400, "L. Gabriel Somlo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe the attached patch fixes Dan Kaminsky's bug, and puts us > back to where an attacker would have to wait for the TTL to expire > before being able to poison the cache. > > Anyone see any reason why we shouldn't do this ? I'm pretty sure that this patch doesn't avoid all variations of Kaminsky's attack, but could you be more specific about the intended attack scenario you have in your mind, by clarifying: - assumption: the cache contents before the attack with the 'trust' level - attack packet: a sequence of query that triggers the attack and forged responses - resulting cache contents when the attack succeeds --- JINMEI, Tatuya Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
