nanog mailing list archives
Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking
From: Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 07:08:28 -0800
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:25 AM David Conrad <drc () virtualized org> wrote:
On Feb 26, 2019, at 2:35 PM, Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com> wrote: On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 1:58 AM Bill Woodcock <woody () pch net> wrote:On Feb 24, 2019, at 10:03 PM, Hank Nussbacher <hank () efes iucc ac il>wrote:Did you have a CAA record defined and if not, why not?It’s something we’d been planning to do but, ironically, we’d been in the process of switching to Let’s Encrypt, and they were one of the two CAs whose process vulnerabilities the attackers were exploiting. So, in this particular case, it wouldn’t have helped. I guess the combination of CAA with a very expensive, or very manual, CA, might be an improvement. But it’s still a band-aid on a bankrupt system. We need to get switched over to DANE as quickly as possible, and stop wasting effort trying to keep the CA system alive with ever-hackier band-aids. -BillDNS guy says the solution for insecure DNS is... wait for it.... more DNS ... Well, no. "DNS guy” (Bill’s a bit more than that, of course) says the solution for a fundamentally broken trust model is a different system to derive trust. Or do you think Let’s Encrypt/Comodo increase trust?
The trust issue has not yet been solved on the internet. Swapping the DNS cabal for the CA cabal is not an improvement. Right? They are really the same arbitraging rent-seekers, just different layers. Using DANE to verify multiple layers is interesting, but the web folks aren’t playing so it won’t go anywhere. Right? Google, Wechat, FB, msft, and Apple aren’t coming along. Since you mentioned Let’s Encrypt, they have reduced plaint text, which is great. But trust is a harder issue. For example, Symantec has lost trust. But only after repeated bad actions.
Regards, -drc
Current thread:
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking, (continued)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Bill Woodcock (Feb 24)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Hank Nussbacher (Feb 24)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Ask Bjørn Hansen (Feb 25)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Hank Nussbacher (Feb 25)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Bill Woodcock (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Sander Steffann (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Michael Hallgren (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Bjørn Mork (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Ca By (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking David Conrad (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Ca By (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking John Levine (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Bill Woodcock (Feb 26)
- Message not available
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Bill Woodcock (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking John Levine (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking bzs (Feb 26)
- Re: A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Bill Woodcock (Feb 26)
- Re: DANE, was A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking John Levine (Feb 26)
- Re: DANE, was A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Julien Goodwin (Feb 26)
- Re: DANE, was A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Mike via NANOG (Feb 27)
- Re: DANE, was A Deep Dive on the Recent Widespread DNS Hijacking Töma Gavrichenkov (Feb 27)