New DNS hijacking technique exploits RAM errors

Re:New DNS hijacking technique exploits RAM errors by mef on Thursday August 04, 2011 @03:53PM (#2847469)

Would this not be compensated in the end-to-end TCP checksumming? And couldn't the traffic to bit-squatting domains be accounted for by the myriad bots that constantly scan the web on port 80?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:New DNS hijacking technique exploits RAM errors by jrockway on Thursday August 04, 2011 @03:56PM (#2847483)

DNS is not a TCP protocol.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:New DNS hijacking technique exploits RAM errors by bysin on Thursday August 04, 2011 @04:07PM (#2847523)

It can be either TCP or UDP. Regardless, UDP has a checksum as well.

The likelihood of a bit-flip is very uncommon. Even taking into account the volume of computers out there, the likelihood of a bit-flip at the exact spot (in the domain name) and moment of a DNS lookup (before the checksum is calculated) is astronomically uncommon. This article is garbage.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:New DNS hijacking technique exploits RAM errors by Florin_Andrei on Thursday August 04, 2011 @04:12PM (#2847546)

I wonder if there are more sources of error than just RAM bit-flipping. The bit could be flipped anywhere it's stored or passing through. If that is the case, the error rate would be orders of magnitude higher.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:New DNS hijacking technique exploits RAM errors by yagibear on Thursday August 04, 2011 @05:17PM (#2847821)

TCP (or UDP) checksums only cover the packet when it is in transit & don't protect the information when it is stored in a device such as a DNS server.

[ Parent | on HN ]