full-disclosure - FW: Question for DNS pros

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0408031125420.7637-100000@tundra.winternet.com>
From: dufresne at winternet.com (Ron DuFresne)
Subject: FW: Question for DNS pros

	[SNIP]

> >
> Mine are identical to yours.  Same host, same src port, same types of
> packets, same ttl, same len)  Whatever this is is obviously crafted from
> some sort of script.  The only thing I can think of is recon.  If someone
> has any bright ideas, speak up.
>

I think Frank mentioned the packets being like 2048 in size, and this
makes me wonder if it's a tad more then mere recon.  Might be trying to
exploit or develope an exploit for bind.  and might be a tool in progress
for a specific bind OS combo.

But, I find just tossing the offenders into the "not allowed" list of
entowrk addresses reduces the log fluff as well as hinder progressive
testing, for them, at least off my networks.

Thanks,

Ron DuFresne
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Cutting the space budget really restores my faith in humanity.  It
eliminates dreams, goals, and ideals and lets us get straight to the
business of hate, debauchery, and self-annihilation." -- Johnny Hart
	***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!***

OK, so you're a Ph.D.  Just don't touch anything.