home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
- Domain hijacking, InterNIC loopholes
-
-
- While filling in details for modification of my domain (dxm.org)
- I realised that I haven't seen much written on domain hijacking.
-
- We all know about mail spoofing, which let's you pretend you're
- someone else. Mail spoofing is one-way - you can send, but not
- receive. This is the same with IP spoofing, where you pretend
- to be a trusted machine, but again you can send but not receive.
- Unlike IP spoofing, which can lead to major security breaks (you
- can become root on someone else's machine), domain hijacking is
- not so much a security issue as a commercial one. Domain hijacking
- uses loopholes in InterNIC domain registration procedures to
- completely take over a domain, allowing you to send and receive
- e-mail, and other traffic such as ftp/www. As I haven't seen this
- explained, and have seen no warnings for sysadmins, here goes:
-
- To do 'IP hijacking' (receive packets as well as send) you
- will need to modify routing tables all over the place, where
- you're not likely to have access. To do domain hijacking,
- you would need to modify DNS entries in several nameservers,
- to which again you're not likely to have privileged access. On
- the other hand, if you could associate an existing domain with
- a nameserver you _do_ control (root access on any machine
- connected to the Net is enough for this), your lack of access
- to the present nameservers would become irrelevant. So,
- 1. set up a nameserver on your machine, with address, cname or
- MX records as required for the victim domain address - victim.com.
- You can do fancy things with nslookup on victim.com's existing
- nameservers to find out what's required. Make sure the MX, address
- and cname records in your machine point to machines under your
- control.
- 2. send a modify domain mail to hostmaster@internic.net, with
- your machine as nameserver replacing any existing ones. The
- InterNIC has no authentication procedures for normal hostmaster
- requests, so your modification will get processed.
- 3. Ta DA! Wait for InterNIC to update its records and broadcast
- changes to other nameservers. From then on, a lookup for victim.com
- will go to ns.internic.net, find that ns.evil.org is the nameserver,
- and send all mail to @victim.com to victim.evil.org, route traffic
- to www.victim.com to www.evil.org, whatever you want.
-
- This is not a security risk? No. But, to quote a delightfully
- low-key document from InterNIC, "[such] an unauthorized update
- could lead a commercial organization to lose its presence on
- the Internet until that update is reversed."
-
- Ah. But that update will be reversed only when victim.com's sysadmins
- realise what's happened. If evil.org is clever enough, it will
- not halt the mail flow, but forward everything on to victim.com
- (after keeping a copy, of course). It could act as a proxy server
- to www.victim.com, accessing all URLs (using victim.com's real
- IP address) on demand and relaying them to browsers who are actually
- looking at www.evil.org. And so on. Unless victim.com's admins
- are particularly observant, they may not notice a thing.
-
- How many sysadmins out there do what victim.com could have done? I.e.
- run nslookup on victim.com regularly to check that the nameservers
- listed are as they should be, and if they're not, to immediately
- send a new update to InterNIC? Not many, I believe. On the other
- hand I know no case of domain hijacking actually taking place. But
- I don't know specific instances of WWW credit card fraud either.
-
- That delightful InterNIC document I mentioned is the draft paper
- on the InterNIC Guardian Object, first out in November 1995, latest
- version out earlier this month. It's an internal InterNIC proposal
- for a "Guardian Object" which would guard any other object (such
- as a domain name, or individual, or hostname, or even another
- guardian). It would allow a range of authentication methods, from
- none (very clever) and MAIL-FROM (easy to spoof) to CRYPT (1-way
- hash, like Unix passwd) and PGP (using public keys stored at
- InterNIC). All domain and other templates will be changed to
- work with guardians. The procedures in the original draft looked
- easy enough; the latest ones are formidable.
-
- â•£Incidentally, this draft appeared two months after the InterNIC
- started charging. The wonders of the profit motive.
-
-
- Rishab
-
- ps. I'm not quite back on the Cypherpunks list yet, so please Cc
- responses you feel are important to me at rishab@dxm.org.
- pps. I quite forgot. The URL for the latest Guardian Object draft:
- ftp://rs.internic.net/policy/internic/internic-gen-1.txt
-
-
-
-