From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 9 08:36:18 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF4051065687 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:36:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx22.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DFC88FC1B for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:36:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 15723 invoked by uid 399); 9 Jan 2009 08:36:17 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO lap.dougb.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 9 Jan 2009 08:36:17 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 00:36:15 -0800 (PST) From: Doug Barton To: matt donovan In-Reply-To: <28283d910901081519g93fc3bdi3abfa5abe4c944b6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <28283d910901081519g93fc3bdi3abfa5abe4c944b6@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) X-message-flag: Outlook -- Not just for spreading viruses anymore! X-OpenPGP-Key-ID: 0xD5B2F0FB Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Albert Thiel , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BIND poisoning?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 08:36:19 -0000 On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, matt donovan wrote: > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Albert Thiel wrote: > >> Whoever manages BIND.. >> >> SANS has a new warning/listing on BIND (Jan 7th) that may effect >> FreeBSD's implementation, but I am not sure... I'm just the mailman >> here :) >> >> http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=5641&rss As I've said several times now, you need to look at https://www.isc.org/node/373 to get the full picture. This issue is only relevant for you if you are using DNSSEC to verify signatures. > well the security team already knows I sent them some research I did and yes > the maintainer for the bind port knows as well I m just waiting back for a > reply from him. to see if he'll update the port or not. I both updated the ports and responded to you yesterday. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection