Alerte pour un CPE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CPE.
CPE Name: cpe:2.3:a:isc:bind:9.17.0:*:*:*:-:*:*:*
Informations
Vendor
iscProduct
bindVersion
9.17.0Software Edition
-Related CVE
| CVE ID | Published | Description | Score | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BIND 9.11.0 -> 9.11.36 9.12.0 -> 9.16.26 9.17.0 -> 9.18.0 BIND Supported Preview Editions: 9.11.4-S1 -> 9.11.36-S1 9.16.8-S1 -> 9.16.26-S1 Versions of BIND 9 earlier than those shown - back to 9.1.0, including Supported Preview Editions - are also believed to be affected but have not been tested as they are EOL. The cache could become poisoned with incorrect records leading to queries being made to the wrong servers, which might also result in false information being returned to clients. | 6.8 |
Medium |
||
| BIND 9.16.11 -> 9.16.26, 9.17.0 -> 9.18.0 and versions 9.16.11-S1 -> 9.16.26-S1 of the BIND Supported Preview Edition. Specifically crafted TCP streams can cause connections to BIND to remain in CLOSE_WAIT status for an indefinite period of time, even after the client has terminated the connection. | 5.3 |
Medium |
||
| In BIND 9.3.0 -> 9.11.35, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.21, and versions 9.9.3-S1 -> 9.11.35-S1 and 9.16.8-S1 -> 9.16.21-S1 of BIND Supported Preview Edition, as well as release versions 9.17.0 -> 9.17.18 of the BIND 9.17 development branch, exploitation of broken authoritative servers using a flaw in response processing can cause degradation in BIND resolver performance. The way the lame cache is currently designed makes it possible for its internal data structures to grow almost infinitely, which may cause significant delays in client query processing. | 5.3 |
Medium |
||
| In BIND 9.5.0 -> 9.11.29, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.13, and versions BIND 9.11.3-S1 -> 9.11.29-S1 and 9.16.8-S1 -> 9.16.13-S1 of BIND Supported Preview Edition, as well as release versions 9.17.0 -> 9.17.1 of the BIND 9.17 development branch, BIND servers are vulnerable if they are running an affected version and are configured to use GSS-TSIG features. In a configuration which uses BIND's default settings the vulnerable code path is not exposed, but a server can be rendered vulnerable by explicitly setting values for the tkey-gssapi-keytab or tkey-gssapi-credential configuration options. Although the default configuration is not vulnerable, GSS-TSIG is frequently used in networks where BIND is integrated with Samba, as well as in mixed-server environments that combine BIND servers with Active Directory domain controllers. For servers that meet these conditions, the ISC SPNEGO implementation is vulnerable to various attacks, depending on the CPU architecture for which BIND was built: For named binaries compiled for 64-bit platforms, this flaw can be used to trigger a buffer over-read, leading to a server crash. For named binaries compiled for 32-bit platforms, this flaw can be used to trigger a server crash due to a buffer overflow and possibly also to achieve remote code execution. We have determined that standard SPNEGO implementations are available in the MIT and Heimdal Kerberos libraries, which support a broad range of operating systems, rendering the ISC implementation unnecessary and obsolete. Therefore, to reduce the attack surface for BIND users, we will be removing the ISC SPNEGO implementation in the April releases of BIND 9.11 and 9.16 (it had already been dropped from BIND 9.17). We would not normally remove something from a stable ESV (Extended Support Version) of BIND, but since system libraries can replace the ISC SPNEGO implementation, we have made an exception in this case for reasons of stability and security. | 9.8 |
Critical |
||
| In BIND 9.0.0 -> 9.11.29, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.13, and versions BIND 9.9.3-S1 -> 9.11.29-S1 and 9.16.8-S1 -> 9.16.13-S1 of BIND Supported Preview Edition, as well as release versions 9.17.0 -> 9.17.11 of the BIND 9.17 development branch, when a vulnerable version of named receives a query for a record triggering the flaw described above, the named process will terminate due to a failed assertion check. The vulnerability affects all currently maintained BIND 9 branches (9.11, 9.11-S, 9.16, 9.16-S, 9.17) as well as all other versions of BIND 9. | 7.5 |
High |
||
| In BIND 9.8.5 -> 9.8.8, 9.9.3 -> 9.11.29, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.13, and versions BIND 9.9.3-S1 -> 9.11.29-S1 and 9.16.8-S1 -> 9.16.13-S1 of BIND 9 Supported Preview Edition, as well as release versions 9.17.0 -> 9.17.11 of the BIND 9.17 development branch, when a vulnerable version of named receives a malformed IXFR triggering the flaw described above, the named process will terminate due to a failed assertion the next time the transferred secondary zone is refreshed. | 6.5 |
Medium |
||
| BIND servers are vulnerable if they are running an affected version and are configured to use GSS-TSIG features. In a configuration which uses BIND's default settings the vulnerable code path is not exposed, but a server can be rendered vulnerable by explicitly setting valid values for the tkey-gssapi-keytab or tkey-gssapi-credentialconfiguration options. Although the default configuration is not vulnerable, GSS-TSIG is frequently used in networks where BIND is integrated with Samba, as well as in mixed-server environments that combine BIND servers with Active Directory domain controllers. The most likely outcome of a successful exploitation of the vulnerability is a crash of the named process. However, remote code execution, while unproven, is theoretically possible. Affects: BIND 9.5.0 -> 9.11.27, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.11, and versions BIND 9.11.3-S1 -> 9.11.27-S1 and 9.16.8-S1 -> 9.16.11-S1 of BIND Supported Preview Edition. Also release versions 9.17.0 -> 9.17.1 of the BIND 9.17 development branch | 8.1 |
High |
||
| In BIND 9.9.12 -> 9.9.13, 9.10.7 -> 9.10.8, 9.11.3 -> 9.11.21, 9.12.1 -> 9.16.5, 9.17.0 -> 9.17.3, also affects 9.9.12-S1 -> 9.9.13-S1, 9.11.3-S1 -> 9.11.21-S1 of the BIND 9 Supported Preview Edition, An attacker who has been granted privileges to change a specific subset of the zone's content could abuse these unintended additional privileges to update other contents of the zone. | 4.3 |
Medium |
||
| In BIND 9.10.0 -> 9.11.21, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.5, 9.17.0 -> 9.17.3, also affects 9.10.5-S1 -> 9.11.21-S1 of the BIND 9 Supported Preview Edition, An attacker that can reach a vulnerable system with a specially crafted query packet can trigger a crash. To be vulnerable, the system must: * be running BIND that was built with "--enable-native-pkcs11" * be signing one or more zones with an RSA key * be able to receive queries from a possible attacker | 7.5 |
High |
||
| In BIND 9.0.0 -> 9.11.21, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.5, 9.17.0 -> 9.17.3, also affects 9.9.3-S1 -> 9.11.21-S1 of the BIND 9 Supported Preview Edition, An attacker on the network path for a TSIG-signed request, or operating the server receiving the TSIG-signed request, could send a truncated response to that request, triggering an assertion failure, causing the server to exit. Alternately, an off-path attacker would have to correctly guess when a TSIG-signed request was sent, along with other characteristics of the packet and message, and spoof a truncated response to trigger an assertion failure, causing the server to exit. | 6.5 |
Medium |
||
| In BIND 9.14.0 -> 9.16.5, 9.17.0 -> 9.17.3, If a server is configured with both QNAME minimization and 'forward first' then an attacker who can send queries to it may be able to trigger the condition that will cause the server to crash. Servers that 'forward only' are not affected. | 7.5 |
High |
||
| In BIND 9.15.6 -> 9.16.5, 9.17.0 -> 9.17.3, An attacker who can establish a TCP connection with the server and send data on that connection can exploit this to trigger the assertion failure, causing the server to exit. | 7.5 |
High |
||
| Using a specially-crafted message, an attacker may potentially cause a BIND server to reach an inconsistent state if the attacker knows (or successfully guesses) the name of a TSIG key used by the server. Since BIND, by default, configures a local session key even on servers whose configuration does not otherwise make use of it, almost all current BIND servers are vulnerable. In releases of BIND dating from March 2018 and after, an assertion check in tsig.c detects this inconsistent state and deliberately exits. Prior to the introduction of the check the server would continue operating in an inconsistent state, with potentially harmful results. | 7.5 |
High |
||
| A malicious actor who intentionally exploits this lack of effective limitation on the number of fetches performed when processing referrals can, through the use of specially crafted referrals, cause a recursing server to issue a very large number of fetches in an attempt to process the referral. This has at least two potential effects: The performance of the recursing server can potentially be degraded by the additional work required to perform these fetches, and The attacker can exploit this behavior to use the recursing server as a reflector in a reflection attack with a high amplification factor. | 8.6 |
High |
||
| There had existed in one of the ISC BIND libraries a bug in a function that was used by dhcpd when operating in DHCPv6 mode. There was also a bug in dhcpd relating to the use of this function per its documentation, but the bug in the library function prevented this from causing any harm. All releases of dhcpd from ISC contain copies of this, and other, BIND libraries in combinations that have been tested prior to release and are known to not present issues like this. Some third-party packagers of ISC software have modified the dhcpd source, BIND source, or version matchup in ways that create the crash potential. Based on reports available to ISC, the crash probability is large and no analysis has been done on how, or even if, the probability can be manipulated by an attacker. Affects: Builds of dhcpd versions prior to version 4.4.1 when using BIND versions 9.11.2 or later, or BIND versions with specific bug fixes backported to them. ISC does not have access to comprehensive version lists for all repackagings of dhcpd that are vulnerable. In particular, builds from other vendors may also be affected. Operators are advised to consult their vendor documentation. | 7.5 |
High |
2025©
tesweb SA
