|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: dos from .kr, plus some classic .kr irresponsibility
From: Bill Royds (Bill_Royds
PCH.GC.CA)Date: Thu Aug 10 2000 - 19:58:56 CDT
- Next message: Luke Dudney: "Re: Can anyone explain this compromise?"
- Previous message: Alfred Huger: "New mailing list for penetration testers
SecurityFocus.com"
- Maybe in reply to: Jason Storm: "dos from .kr, plus some classic .kr irresponsibility"
- Next in thread: Michal 'CeFeK' Nazarewicz: "Re: HELO/EHLP attack?."
- Maybe reply: Bill Royds: "Re: dos from .kr, plus some classic .kr irresponsibility"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Here is a wnderful example of difficulty of contacting administrators of IP
blocks.
I found a log line in our sendmail log this morning indicating an email had
been rejected because the sending host did not have a DNS entry. We use
Sendmails ability to verify authenticity of sending domains to block spam.
Aug 10 01:01:44 point sendmail[4664]: BAA04664: ruleset=check_mail,
arg1=<invoice
rolemail.internic.net>, relay=rolemail.internic.net
[216.168.233.54] (may be forged), reject=501
<invoice
rolemail.internic.net>... Sender domain must exist
I thought this was wierd because internic (Network Solutions), of all places,
should have valid DNS entries for their mail servers.
Perhaps it really was a spammer faking the reverse DNS entry to allow the spam
to get in so I looked up the IP address in ARIN whois:
08/10/00 20:53:50 IP block 216.168.233.54
whois.aunic.net
Trying 216.168.233.54 at ARIN
Trying 216.168.233 at ARIN
Network Solutions, Inc. (NETBLK-NSI-NETBLK1)
505 Huntmar Park Drive
Herndon, VA 20170
US
Netname: NSI-NETBLK1
Netblock: 216.168.224.0 - 216.168.255.255
Coordinator:
Karas, Michael (MK124-ARIN) mkaras
netsol.com
703-326-2650 (DSN) 295-3304 (DSN) 295-3304
Domain System inverse mapping provided by:
NS1.NETSOL.COM 216.168.224.200
NS2.NETSOL.COM 198.17.208.83
NS3.NETSOL.COM 216.168.224.201
Record last updated on 02-May-2000.
Database last updated on 10-Aug-2000 17:54:58 EDT.
The ARIN Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet
Network Information: Networks, ASN's, and related POC's.
Please use the whois server at rs.internic.net for DOMAIN related
Information and whois.nic.mil for NIPRNET Information.
It was Network Solutions so I decided to send an email to registered contact for
that block asking that they correct their DNS entries.
Here is the resulting error reply:
Your message
To: mkaras
netsol.com
Cc: Postmaster
my.domain.ca
Subject: Please ensure that you use email hosts with both forward and
reverse DNS entries.
Sent: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 17:56:36 -0400
did not reach the following recipient(s):
mkaras
netsol.com on Thu, 10 Aug 2000 17:54:31 -0400
The recipient name is not recognized
The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=US;a=
;p=netsol;l=?0008102154QLP94K7M
MSEXCH:IMS:Netsol:US-Herndon-NIC:NETSOL-NIC-EX03 0 (000C05A6) Unknown
Recipient
Message-ID: <85256937.007890A5.00
my.domain.ca>
From: Bill_Royds
my.domain.ca
To: mkaras
netsol.com
Cc: Postmaster
my.domain.ca
Subject: Please ensure that you use email hosts with both forward and reverse
DNS entries.
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 17:56:36 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
X-MS-Embedded-Report:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
This morning our Internet email server rejected an attempt to send an email
from an IP in your range that was using a source address of a host with no DNS
host name.
We have a policy of not accepting email with no valid return address.
Please ensure that you maintain your DNS tables accurately with a forward
DNS entry for rolemail.internic.net.
Here is our sendmail syslog for the connect attempt.
Aug 10 01:01:44 point sendmail[4664]: BAA04664: ruleset=check_mail,
arg1=<invoice
rolemail.internic.net>, relay=rolemail.internic.net
[216.168.233.54] (may be forged), reject=501 <invoice
rolemail.internic.net>...
Sender domain must exist
Times are EDT UTC-0400
Jose Nazario <jose
BIOCSERVER.BIOC.CWRU.EDU> on 08/09/2000 15:50:06
Please respond to Jose Nazario <jose
BIOCSERVER.BIOC.CWRU.EDU>
To: INCIDENTS
SECURITYFOCUS.COM
cc: (bcc: Bill Royds/HullOttawa/PCH/CA)
Subject: Re: dos from .kr, plus some classic
.kr irresponsibility
On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Dan Hollis wrote:
> Actually, I have been thinking of writing up an RFC for contact
> information (security, spam, etc) stored in reverse dns TXT records.
totally unneeded. people should just keep their NIC records up to freakin
date and actually freakin reply. i'm so !^%$!^%# sick and !#
&^%! tired of
domains that bounce, have people who have left or ignore huge assed
problems, not pissy portscans but serious freakin holes.
once i get back to my desk i'll finish my take on RFP's policy for
bugtraq'ing as i have tweaked it for incident handling.
in the meantime, if you get a collect call from me as a domain admin,
answer the freakin phone, i'm probably telling you something important.
out of patience,
jose nazario jose
biochemistry.cwru.edu
PGP fingerprint: 89 B0 81 DA 5B FD 7E 00 99 C3 B2 CD 48 A0 07 80
Public key available at http://biocserver.cwru.edu/~jose/pgp-key.asc
- Next message: Luke Dudney: "Re: Can anyone explain this compromise?"
- Previous message: Alfred Huger: "New mailing list for penetration testers
SecurityFocus.com"
- Maybe in reply to: Jason Storm: "dos from .kr, plus some classic .kr irresponsibility"
- Next in thread: Michal 'CeFeK' Nazarewicz: "Re: HELO/EHLP attack?."
- Maybe reply: Bill Royds: "Re: dos from .kr, plus some classic .kr irresponsibility"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]