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.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

7/11/2013
02:00 AM
50%
50%

Generic TLDs Threaten Name Collisions, Information Leakage

Security problems could ensue if common internal TLDs -- such as .corp and .exchange -- are allowed to be registered

As the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) continues its march toward the eventual approval of hundreds, if not more than 1,000, generic top-level domains (gTLDs), security experts warn that some of the proposed names could weaken network security at many companies.

Two major issues could cause problems for companies: If domain names that are frequently used on a company's internal network -- such as .corp, .mail, and .exchange -- become accepted gTLDs, then organizations could inadvertently expose data and server access to the Internet. In addition, would-be attackers could easily pick up certificates for domains that are not yet assigned and cache them for use in man-in-the-middle attacks when the specific gTLD is deployed.

"You will have a lot of people ending up at places [domains] where they do not expect to be," says Jeremy Rowley, associate general counsel for certificate authority DigiCert and a member of the Certificate Authority Security Council (CASC).

Among the most common internal company domain names that are also candidates to become generic TLDs are .home, .corp, .mail, and .exchange. A survey of CASC members found that between 11,000 and 15,000 certificates have been issued for nonroutable domains and could potentially be used to attack, Rowley says.

In addition, information leakage by these systems could cause problems as well. Currently, 25 percent of queries to the domain name system are for devices and computers that do not exist, suggesting the companies are already leaking information to the Internet, according to Danny McPherson, Verisign's chief security officer. While Verisign has its own applications in for global TLDs, the company has arguably more to lose if the rollout of top-level domains goes poorly because it could impact the performance of other facets of the domain-name infrastructure, he says.

"Nobody is providing any adult supervision, and that makes me -- in my role -- very nervous," he says.

The security issues underscore that the ICANN process for creating gTLDs has mainly focused on the companies applying for a specific top-level domain and not on the Internet users who could be impacted by that application, according to two members of PayPal's Information Risk Management group.

[PayPal is among the organizations invited to join a new working group that ultimately will build the framework for the proposed .secure top-level Internet domain. See Selling A Secure Internet Domain.]

ICANN's "analysis and recommendations fall short of what is needed by primarily considering the potential impact of the widespread use of such names to the applicants for these names," wrote Paypal's Brad Hill and Bill Smith in a March letter to ICANN. "The considerable security and operational risks to users of these names is not given adequate consideration. Delegating these names will put millions of users and high value systems at considerable risk."

Another problem hindering any solution: Because the organizations managing the root name servers assiduously maintain their independence from one another, there is little sharing of data about what Internet issues are impacting those servers. When the global TLD systems is turned on, the response to any issue will likely be slowed because of the lack of collaboration and information sharing, he says.

"We need an early warning system," McPherson says. "We need to have visibility across the root. We don't currently have the capability across the root system to say, 'Here is the rate of queries for a certain string and who are asking for it.'"

While any adoption of gTLDs will initially be slow, companies should prepare by moving away from internal names that match any put forth in the gTLD application process, says David Ulevitch, CEO for OpenDNS, a provider of security and DNS services.

"There is going to be a lot of short-term pain because of generic TLDs," Ulevitch says. "Lots of security appliances will not expect to see them, and that will cause the security to break."

The concerns may, in the end, be moot. ICANN could take the feedback from security companies and certificate firms and not approve popular internal naming schemes, such as .corp and .exchange.

"Even though they may not allow those to be registered, it pays to be prepared," says DigiCert's Rowley.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Add Your Comment" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message. Veteran technology journalist of more than 20 years. Former research engineer. Written for more than two dozen publications, including CNET News.com, Dark Reading, MIT's Technology Review, Popular Science, and Wired News. Five awards for journalism, including Best Deadline ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
cjturner
50%
50%
cjturner,
User Rank: Apprentice
7/11/2013 | 8:28:21 PM
re: Generic TLDs Threaten Name Collisions, Information Leakage
Another important aspect; the costs related to the use/ownership of well-known names. Many well-known companies and organizations have had to buy up their names in all TLDs. This could get kind of expensive for those guys.
7 Tips for Infosec Pros Considering A Lateral Career Move
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/21/2020
For Mismanaged SOCs, The Price Is Not Right
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
IT 2020: A Look Ahead
Are you ready for the critical changes that will occur in 2020? We've compiled editor insights from the best of our network (Dark Reading, Data Center Knowledge, InformationWeek, ITPro Today and Network Computing) to deliver to you a look at the trends, technologies, and threats that are emerging in the coming year. Download it today!
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Organizations have invested in a sweeping array of security technologies to address challenges associated with the growing number of cybersecurity attacks. However, the complexity involved in managing these technologies is emerging as a major problem. Read this report to find out what your peers biggest security challenges are and the technologies they are using to address them.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-16029
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-26
A vulnerability in the application programming interface (API) of Cisco Smart Software Manager On-Prem could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to change user account information which can prevent users from logging in, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition of the web interface. Th...
CVE-2020-3115
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-26
A vulnerability in the CLI of the Cisco SD-WAN Solution vManage software could allow an authenticated, local attacker to elevate privileges to root-level privileges on the underlying operating system. The vulnerability is due to insufficient input validation. An attacker could exploit this vulnerabi...
CVE-2020-3121
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-26
A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Small Business Smart and Managed Switches could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site scripting (XSS) attack against a user of the interface. The vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of user-supplie...
CVE-2020-3129
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-26
A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Unity Connection Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to perform a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) attack. The vulnerability is due to insufficient input validation by the web-based management interface. An attacker c...
CVE-2020-3131
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-26
[CVE-2020-3131_su] A vulnerability in the Cisco Webex Teams client for Windows could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to cause the client to crash, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition. The attacker needs a valid developer account to exploit this vulnerability. The vulnerability i...