IMHO this is an important bug because it randomly interferes with other
applications - lots of which use  defined ports above 1024.

My recent case caused an OpenVPN instance to fail to start. More
seriously it created a security risk since the port in question was of
course open on the firewall for purposes of the VPN, and an outsider
could have used it to fire data at dhcpd with who knows what results.

There is the same issue with isc-dhcp-client; per
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/isc-dhcp/+bug/1176046 it seems
the folks at ISC are unwilling to respect the defined dynamic port
range, and they should be persuaded. Rather than allowing the kernel to
assign a random port number like most applications, they want to do it
"by self".

The solution for that bug was to split isc-dhcp-client into two
versions, one compiled with and one without ddns support. That could
also be done with dhcpd, however, in my opinion it's an ugly solution.

If we are going to have to just live with random ports starting from
1024, it would make a LOT more sense to alter the effect of ddns-update-
style none (and ddns-updates off) so that dhcpd does NOT bind to random
ports when those config parameters dictate that the random ports are
never going to be used anyway.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1670303

Title:
  dhcpd does not respect ip_local_port _range or ip_local_reserved_ports

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/isc-dhcp/+bug/1670303/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to