Time to move from the mechanics and policy of DNS replication to a new topic. Within the global DNS there are two roles that a server can play: ones that hold data - nameservers, and ones that fetch that data for clients - resolvers. Nameservers need to provide their data to the entire Internet whereas resolvers serve a small set of client systems.
Having designed a redundant DNS infrastructure, one of the most common mistakes is failing to ensure that secondary nameservers can successfully replicate data for the domains it is hosting. The most common way this is done on the Internet is though zone transfers - the AXFR command. This command causes a DNS server to reply with all the data it knows for a domain.
When providing DNS nameserver services a degree of redundancy is needed. In most cases the DNS records for a particular domain will be hosted by at least two nameservers, but is that enough by itself?
When building a resilient system the risks involved with the failure modes of the system need to be considered and weighed up against the associated costs and overheads. As a common example - does having both DNS servers on the same local network segment provide you with protection against network failure? Probably not.
Category | Count |
---|---|
Compromise | 6 |
Copyright | 4 |
Denial of Service | 12 |
General Query | 4 |
LEA Query | 2 |
Legal/Policy Query | 0 |
Malware | 778 |
Net/Security Query | 2 |
Other | 21 |
Phishing | 34 |
Scanning | 22 |
Social Engineering | 1 |
Following on from our messages and briefing at the start of the year, DDOS attacks are continuing to occur at a greater frequency than they have in previous years. We have been working to assist affected customers when they happen.
Many of the attacks make use of unauthenticated UDP based services to reflect and amplify traffic against the chosen target. Open DNS resolvers (53/udp) and increasingly CHARGEN (19/udp) are the two most abused services. It's not unusual to see attacks in the order of 10Gb/s.
Category | Count |
---|---|
Compromise | 7 |
Copyright | 0 |
Denial of Service | 9 |
General Query | 4 |
LEA Query | 1 |
Legal/Policy Query | 0 |
Malware | 424 |
Net/Security Query | 2 |
Other | 17 |
Phishing | 33 |
Scanning | 18 |
Social Engineering | 1 |
Category | Count |
---|---|
Compromise | 128 |
Copyright | 1 |
Denial of Service | 4 |
General Query | 2 |
LEA Query | 2 |
Legal/Policy Query | 0 |
Malware | 420 |
Net/Security Query | 4 |
Other | 11 |
Phishing | 49 |
Scanning | 30 |
Social Engineering | 0 |
Category | Count |
---|---|
Compromise | 111 |
Copyright | 3 |
Denial of Service | 7 |
General Query | 8 |
LEA Query | 5 |
Legal/Policy Query | 3 |
Malware | 336 |
Net/Security Query | 8 |
Other | 16 |
Phishing | 44 |
Scanning | 45 |
Social Engineering | 0 |
Category | Count |
---|---|
Compromise | 74 |
Copyright | 3 |
Denial of Service | 9 |
General Query | 7 |
LEA Query | 2 |
Legal/Policy Query | 1 |
Malware | 567 |
Net/Security Query | 12 |
Other | 11 |
Phishing | 36 |
Scanning | 26 |
Social Engineering | 1 |
