Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Perimeter

8/28/2008
07:40 AM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Feds Shift Gears & Mandate DNSSEC for All Agencies

US government takes a harder line on securing DNS infrastructure, but DNSSEC still hotly debated

The DNS flaw scare appears to have spooked the feds into requiring widespread adoption of DNSSEC.

A new federal policy issued this week says all federal agencies must adopt the secure DNS standard, DNSSEC, by December of 2009 for their DNS servers. The new Office of Management and Budget (OMB) mandate is a departure from its previous policy that recommended that only “high and moderate impact” systems adopt the DNS Security Extensions technology, which digitally signs DNS records so that DNS responses can be validated as legitimate.

DNS security has been front-burnered lately, with the exposure of the big DNS flaw and subsequent attacks on servers that haven’t patched it. Not everyone agrees that DNSSEC is the answer, however: “The only thing DNS and DNSSEC have in common are the first three letters in their names,” says David Ulevitch, CEO of OpenDNS and a DNS expert. “I don’t think it’s a good move” for the federal government to adopt DNSSEC, he says.

Ulevitch argues that DNSSEC adoption requires an overhaul of the DNS infrastructure and that there are better and simpler options out there. For DNSSEC’s validation model to work for DNS servers, it has to be adopted from end to end, he says. “If any along the path don’t [implement] it, it’s useless,” Ulevitch says. “It requires a whole signing infrastructure,” which is expensive and manpower-intensive, not to mention politically charged issue of control over the digital keys, he says.

Mark Beckett, vice president of marketing at Secure64, a DNSSEC vendor, says that DNSSEC deployment is less complex now, with products such as Secure64’s that help ease the process. “DNSSEC adds critically needed security to DNS that no other technology can duplicate. Time spent on developing other solutions will just delay closing the vulnerability,” Beckett says.

OpenDNS’s Ulevitch and others have come up with alternative DNS security solutions that are easy to deploy and don’t making radical changes to the DNS infrastructure, Ulevitch says. “Not everyone has to deploy it for it to be effective immediately,” he says of the solution he helped build, called DNS Ping.

Meanwhile, the federal government has set an ambitious deadline of January of next year for converting the top-level “.gov” domain to DNSSEC. “This policy requires that the top level .gov domain will be DNSSEC signed and processes to enable secure delegated sub-domains will be developed. Signing the top level .gov domain is a critical procedure necessary for broad deployment of DNSSEC, increases the utility of DNSSEC, and simplifies lower level deployment by agencies,” wrote Karen Evans, administrator for the OMB’s Office of E-Government and Information Technology in a memorandum to agencies sent out late last week.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Discuss" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

  • OpenDNS
  • Secure64 Software Corp.

    Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

    Comment  | 
    Print  | 
    More Insights
  • Comments
    Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
    Data Privacy Protections for the Most Vulnerable -- Children
    Dimitri Sirota, Founder & CEO of BigID,  10/17/2019
    Sodinokibi Ransomware: Where Attackers' Money Goes
    Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  10/15/2019
    Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
    White Papers
    Video
    Cartoon
    Current Issue
    7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
    This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
    Flash Poll
    2019 Online Malware and Threats
    2019 Online Malware and Threats
    As cyberattacks become more frequent and more sophisticated, enterprise security teams are under unprecedented pressure to respond. Is your organization ready?
    Twitter Feed
    Dark Reading - Bug Report
    Bug Report
    Enterprise Vulnerabilities
    From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
    CVE-2019-18214
    PUBLISHED: 2019-10-19
    The Video_Converter app 0.1.0 for Nextcloud allows denial of service (CPU and memory consumption) via multiple concurrent conversions because many FFmpeg processes may be running at once. (The workload is not queued for serial execution.)
    CVE-2019-18202
    PUBLISHED: 2019-10-19
    Information Disclosure is possible on WAGO Series PFC100 and PFC200 devices before FW12 due to improper access control. A remote attacker can check for the existence of paths and file names via crafted HTTP requests.
    CVE-2019-18209
    PUBLISHED: 2019-10-19
    templates/pad.html in Etherpad-Lite 1.7.5 has XSS when the browser does not encode the path of the URL, as demonstrated by Internet Explorer.
    CVE-2019-18198
    PUBLISHED: 2019-10-18
    In the Linux kernel before 5.3.4, a reference count usage error in the fib6_rule_suppress() function in the fib6 suppression feature of net/ipv6/fib6_rules.c, when handling the FIB_LOOKUP_NOREF flag, can be exploited by a local attacker to corrupt memory, aka CID-ca7a03c41753.
    CVE-2019-18197
    PUBLISHED: 2019-10-18
    In xsltCopyText in transform.c in libxslt 1.1.33, a pointer variable isn't reset under certain circumstances. If the relevant memory area happened to be freed and reused in a certain way, a bounds check could fail and memory outside a buffer could be written to, or uninitialized data could be disclo...