Debian: DSA-3904-2: bind9 regression update

    Date23 Jul 2017
    CategoryDebian
    66
    Posted ByLinuxSecurity Advisories
    The security update announced as DSA-3904-1 in bind9 introduced a regression. The fix for CVE-2017-3142 broke verification of TSIG signed TCP message sequences where not all the messages contain TSIG records. This is conform to the spec and may be used in AXFR and IXFR response.
    
    - -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Debian Security Advisory DSA-3904-2                   This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
    https://www.debian.org/security/                        Yves-Alexis Perez
    July 23, 2017                         https://www.debian.org/security/faq
    - -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Package        : bind9
    Debian Bug     : 868952
    
    The security update announced as DSA-3904-1 in bind9 introduced a regression.
    The fix for CVE-2017-3142 broke verification of TSIG signed TCP message
    sequences where not all the messages contain TSIG records. This is conform to
    the spec and may be used in AXFR and IXFR response.
    
    For the oldstable distribution (jessie), this problem has been fixed
    in version 1:9.9.5.dfsg-9+deb8u13.
    
    For the stable distribution (stretch), this problem has been fixed in
    version 1:9.10.3.dfsg.P4-12.3+deb9u2.
    
    For the testing distribution (buster), this problem has been fixed
    in version 1:9.10.3.dfsg.P4-12.5.
    
    For the unstable distribution (sid), this problem has been fixed in
    version 1:9.10.3.dfsg.P4-12.5.
    
    We recommend that you upgrade your bind9 packages.
    
    Further information about Debian Security Advisories, how to apply
    these updates to your system and frequently asked questions can be
    found at: https://www.debian.org/security/
    
    Mailing list: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
    
    You are not authorised to post comments.

    Comments powered by CComment

    LinuxSecurity Poll

    What do you think of the articles on LinuxSecurity?

    No answer selected. Please try again.
    Please select either existing option or enter your own, however not both.
    Please select minimum 0 answer(s) and maximum 3 answer(s).
    /main-polls/24-what-do-you-think-of-the-quality-of-the-articles-on-linuxsecurity?task=poll.vote&format=json
    24
    radio
    [{"id":"87","title":"Excellent, don't change a thing!","votes":"25","type":"x","order":"1","pct":54.35,"resources":[]},{"id":"88","title":"Should be more technical","votes":"5","type":"x","order":"2","pct":10.87,"resources":[]},{"id":"89","title":"Should include more HOWTOs","votes":"16","type":"x","order":"3","pct":34.78,"resources":[]}]["#ff5b00","#4ac0f2","#b80028","#eef66c","#60bb22","#b96a9a","#62c2cc"]["rgba(255,91,0,0.7)","rgba(74,192,242,0.7)","rgba(184,0,40,0.7)","rgba(238,246,108,0.7)","rgba(96,187,34,0.7)","rgba(185,106,154,0.7)","rgba(98,194,204,0.7)"]350
    bottom200

    We use cookies to provide and improve our services. By using our site, you consent to our Cookie Policy.