bind9 has no rate limit option

Bug #1202278 reported by Robstarusa
262
This bug affects 2 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
bind9 (Ubuntu)
Fix Released
Wishlist
Unassigned
Precise
Won't Fix
Wishlist
Unassigned

Bug Description

Bind9 is vulnerable to being used as a DDOS even when recursion is turned off.
Ref: http://www.us-cert.gov/ncas/alerts/TA138-088A

Can the Ubuntu team (or whomever is responsible for the bind9 package) please integrate this into a new package for the LTS?

I've looked at the changelogs for 12.04 on bind9 package & can't see that it was added. I've also tried adding the rate limit directive & I get "uknown option rate-limit" and bind9 fails to start.

As of this update, I have the latest bind9 package installed ( 1:9.8.1.dfsg.P1-4ubuntu0.6 )

One recommended fix is here:

http://www.redbarn.org/dns/ratelimits

If this is not elgible for an LTS, can we please add it to 12.10 or 13.04?

Thank you,

Robert

Robstarusa (rob-naseca)
information type: Private Security → Public Security
Changed in bind9 (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
Revision history for this message
Seth Arnold (seth-arnold) wrote :

Indeed, this looks useful.

However, performing the rate limiting in the kernel using firewall rules can be more efficient and not require any BIND patches.

There are three mechanisms I can think of for performing this rate limiting today, without waiting for updates:

- Insert iptables hashlimit rules. Here is one suggested rule:
-p udp --dport 53 -m hashlimit --hashlimit-above 200/sec \
 --hashlimit-burst 500 --hashlimit-mode srcip --hashlimit-name DNS-ABUSER \
 --hashlimit-htable-size 8192 --hashlimit-htable-max 32768 -j drop_log_dns_abuse
(The rule was suggested by joerg jungermann in another context at http://mailman.powerdns.com/pipermail/pdns-users/2012-September/009235.html )

- Use phreld to dynamically insert DROP rules for hosts that bypass limits: http://www.digitalgenesis.com/software/phrel/manual/phreld.html (Sadly, not packaged for Ubuntu.) I know this option is preferred by some commercial DNS hosts.

- Use ufw limit to add some quick limits. Since this is intended first and foremost to prevent OpenSSH brute-force connection attempts, the default limits may be too low for applying to DNS. This might still be appropriate for very small installations, however. Your mileage my vary.

I hope this helps. Thanks.

Revision history for this message
Robstarusa (rob-naseca) wrote :

That does help, however I've already uninstalled the Ubuntu bind9 version & created my own from source + patch.

I think fixing the actual problem versus a firewall workaround is a better solution, personally.

I understand that I'd more likely have had a fix if I reported it upstream, but this isn't a new problem as far as my googling shows, & it appears upstream hasn't done anything yet.

However, I appreciate your help & response.

Revision history for this message
Robstarusa (rob-naseca) wrote :

It looks like upstream is adding this. Can we get this moved into an LTS after it is out? Should this still be marked "wishlist" since upstream is taking care of it?

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/isc-adds-ddos-defense-module-to-bind-software-1814775.htm

Revision history for this message
Seth Arnold (seth-arnold) wrote :

It might be possible to bring the feature to 12.04 LTS, through one of two mechanisms:

The Stable Release Update process https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates is usually used to fix high-impact bugs. I'd be prepared to ask the SRU team to include rate-limiting DNS responses as such an issue.

Or, once the feature is in a newer Ubuntu release, you could ask the Backports team to prepare a wholesale backport of the entirely new version of bind9: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports

Thanks

Revision history for this message
LaMont Jones (lamont) wrote :

Fixed in 1:9.9.3.dfsg.P2-3

Changed in bind9 (Ubuntu):
status: Confirmed → Fix Released
Changed in bind9 (Ubuntu Precise):
status: New → Confirmed
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
Revision history for this message
Robstarusa (rob-naseca) wrote :

I've started a backport request under LP #1218638

Revision history for this message
Steve Langasek (vorlon) wrote :

The Precise Pangolin has reached end of life, so this bug will not be fixed for that release

Changed in bind9 (Ubuntu Precise):
status: Confirmed → Won't Fix
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public Security information  
Everyone can see this security related information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.