Enterprise Data Protection
Home > Ask the Security Experts > Platform Security Questions & Answers > Are open recursive DNS servers inherently insecure?
Ask The Security Expert: Questions & Answers
EMAIL THIS

Are open recursive DNS servers inherently insecure?

Michael Cobb EXPERT RESPONSE FROM: Michael Cobb

Pose a Question
Other Security Categories
Meet all Security Experts
Become an Expert for this site


Digg This!    StumbleUpon Toolbar StumbleUpon    Bookmark with Delicious Del.icio.us   


>
QUESTION POSED ON: 28 February 2008
Are open recursive DNS servers inherently insecure? How are their vulnerabilities any more or less dangerous than closed recursive servers?

>
EXPERT RESPONSE
It might be a mistake to characterize open recursive DNS name servers as inherently insecure because the actual point of recursion was to make the Internet run better. By spreading the enormous task of looking up tens of millions of domain names across a massively distributed hierarchical architecture, recursion removes the need for one or more impossibly huge directories. Recursion results in faster lookups because many queries can be answered from local or relatively local DNS tables.

Sadly, the willingness of malicious users to abuse this service has made it part of numerous ongoing threats. Several denial-of-service attacks use DNS recursion to amplify their effect, sometimes in conjunction with the abuse of other well-intentioned Internet features like RFC 2671 (Extension Mechanisms for DNS - EDNS). These extension functions require name servers to return much larger responses to queries, thus enabling attacks with much higher UDP response amplifications.

However, just like open relays, which were a good idea for email until they became abused by spammers, open recursive DNS servers have also been frowned upon. US-CERT now recommends that "where possible, organizations should secure their DNS servers to ensure that they do not allow recursion or, at a minimum, restrict access to only trusted domains and disable the ability to send additional delegation information." The US-CERT document, cited above, provides detailed instructions for secure DNS configuration.

In other words, turn off or close the recursion function, which is on by default in many versions of DNS serverware. An open recursive DNS server puts an organization -- and the Internet at large -- at greater risk than a non-recursive or closed recursive DNS server would. Major hosting companies like GoDaddy.com Inc. feel the same way. Its official site warns operators of dedicated servers, saying that: "We do not allow recursive DNS to run on dedicated or virtual dedicated servers unless it runs locally and for a specific IP range."

There are some dissenting voices, notably David Ulevitch, CEO of OpenDNS, which offers a free open recursive DNS service. He was critical of the conclusions drawn by researchers from Georgia Tech and Google that there were around 17 million open-recursive DNS servers on the Internet, of which 68,000 or roughly 0.4% were answering DNS queries with false information, redirecting people to malicious sites. While not arguing with the numbers, Ulevitch pointed out that the researchers were only able to test open recursive DNS name servers, and there is no reason to think closed servers were not also acting maliciously.

The bottom line is that enterprise DNS security needs to be made a greater priority, for the sake of the organization and its ability to withstand future denial-of-service attacks, as well as for the sake of the Net as a whole. This will be no small task. It is estimated that there are more than 11 million DNS servers on the Internet today, at least half of which allow recursive queries and more than 30% allow zone transfers or synchronization among domain zones. Not all of the world's DNS servers are insecure, but even if 90% were secure, that would leave over a million to worry about.

More information:

  • Learn more about how to protect DNS servers.
  • Security luminary Roger Thompson explains how hijacked DNS servers could allow an Internet assault.


  • Sound Off! -   Be the first to post a message to Sound Off!


    Digg This!    StumbleUpon Toolbar StumbleUpon    Bookmark with Delicious Del.icio.us   


    RELATED CONTENT
    Platform Security
    Is attack code valuable for vulnerabilities or just a publicity stunt?
    Will the features of Windows Vista SP1 encourage wider adoption of the OS?
    Is a Master Boot Record (MBR) rootkit completely invisible to the OS?
    Should whole disk encryption products be used with data backup software?
    Which operating system can best secure an FTP site?
    Is desktop virtualization a realistic enterprise option?
    Does FTPS encrypt data packets at the hardware or software level?
    Should disks be encrypted at the hardware level?
    Is Triple DES a more secure encryption scheme than DUKPT?
    Will a platform-as-a-service (PaaS) environment put data at risk?

    Enterprise Data Protection
    Growing Mac use prompts call for better security
    Web 2.0 and e-discovery: Risks and countermeasures
    Screencast: Recovering lost data with WinHex
    Countermeasures against targeted attacks in the enterprise
    Websense, Reconnex top Forrester ranking of DLP vendors
    Penetration testing: Helping your compliance efforts
    Worst practices: Learning from bad security tips
    The ins and outs of database encryption
    RSA attendees see data classification, rights management projects stumble
    Worst practices: Encryption conniptions

    TCP/IP
    How to protect DNS servers
    What to consider before opening a port
    What is the relationship between open port range and overall security risk?
    Will iptables screen UDP traffic?
    Troubleshooting proxy firewall connections
    Admins run into trouble with Microsoft updates
    Microsoft to release DNS patch Tuesday
    Database security undermined by protocol loopholes, lax defenses
    'Worm' targets Sun Solaris Telnet flaw
    Can a TCP connection be made without an open port?

    RELATED GLOSSARY TERMS
    Terms from Whatis.com − the technology online dictionary
    cut-and-paste attack  (SearchSecurity.com)
    data splitting  (SearchSecurity.com)
    deperimeterization  (SearchSecurity.com)
    Google hacking  (SearchSecurity.com)
    masquerade  (SearchSecurity.com)
    snooping  (SearchSecurity.com)

    RELATED RESOURCES
    2020software.com, trial software downloads for accounting software, ERP software, CRM software and business software systems
    Search Bitpipe.com for the latest white papers and business webcasts
    Whatis.com, the online computer dictionary



    Search and Browse the Expert Answer Center
    Search and browse more than 25,000 question and answer pairs from more than 250 TechTarget industry experts.
    Browse our Expert Advice

    TechTarget Security Media
    Information Security View this month\\'s issue and subscribe today.
    Information Security Decisions Apply online for free conference admission.
    SearchSecurity.com
    HomeNewsMagazineWebcastsWhite PapersLearningAdviceTopicsEventsAbout Us

    About Us  |  Contact Us  |  For Advertisers  |  For Business Partners  |  Site Index  |  RSS
    TechTarget provides enterprise IT professionals with the information they need to perform their jobs - from developing strategy, to making cost-effective IT purchase decisions and managing their organizations' IT projects - with its network of technology-specific Web sites, events and magazines.

    TechTarget Corporate Web Site  |  Media Kits  |  Reprints  |  Site Map




    All Rights Reserved, Copyright 2003 - 2008, TechTarget | Read our Privacy Policy
      TechTarget - The IT Media ROI Experts