<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic DNSSEC for VMS? in Operating System - OpenVMS</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/dnssec-for-vms/m-p/5123738#M56764</link>
    <description>There have been a number of publications on a flaw in the design of DNS that, when expoited, could effect all name translations on the Inernet, and I did read reports that this bug has already been exploited.&lt;BR /&gt;What I understood is that the BIND implementation on VMS contains this bug as well and you would be vulnerable if you have set it up as a chaching resolver.&lt;BR /&gt;(source: &lt;A href="http://64.223.189.234/node/945)" target="_blank"&gt;http://64.223.189.234/node/945)&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I don't know how many VMS systems are set up this way and could be acessed - but I wonderer when there will be a patch for VMS? I haven't seen it yet for any of the platforms.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 05:28:46 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Willem Grooters</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2008-08-07T05:28:46Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>DNSSEC for VMS?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/dnssec-for-vms/m-p/5123738#M56764</link>
      <description>There have been a number of publications on a flaw in the design of DNS that, when expoited, could effect all name translations on the Inernet, and I did read reports that this bug has already been exploited.&lt;BR /&gt;What I understood is that the BIND implementation on VMS contains this bug as well and you would be vulnerable if you have set it up as a chaching resolver.&lt;BR /&gt;(source: &lt;A href="http://64.223.189.234/node/945)" target="_blank"&gt;http://64.223.189.234/node/945)&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I don't know how many VMS systems are set up this way and could be acessed - but I wonderer when there will be a patch for VMS? I haven't seen it yet for any of the platforms.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 05:28:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/dnssec-for-vms/m-p/5123738#M56764</guid>
      <dc:creator>Willem Grooters</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-08-07T05:28:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: DNSSEC for VMS?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/dnssec-for-vms/m-p/5123739#M56765</link>
      <description>I'd expect very few OpenVMS systems are being used as DNS servers.  &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;If you are (and if your DNS servers are either exposed to the Internet or if you don't trust your clients), Kaminsky's DNS exposure can be nasty; attacks can require less than 15 seconds or so, and they're active in the wild. &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;One of the higher-profile targets that's fallen so far was an unpatched AT&amp;amp;T DNS server.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Process Software has released patched DNS servers for OpenVMS.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;And FWIW, DNSSEC is an upgrade from DNS; DNSSEC requirements are coming on-line, starting with the .ORG domains.  If you're serving DNS for .ORG, you're going to be migrating earlier than most.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 11:31:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/dnssec-for-vms/m-p/5123739#M56765</guid>
      <dc:creator>Hoff</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-08-07T11:31:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: DNSSEC for VMS?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/dnssec-for-vms/m-p/5123740#M56766</link>
      <description>nb: ITRC is incorrectly including the parenthesis onto the end of the URL.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="http://64.223.189.234/node/945" target="_blank"&gt;http://64.223.189.234/node/945&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:20:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/dnssec-for-vms/m-p/5123740#M56766</guid>
      <dc:creator>Hoff</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-08-07T18:20:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: DNSSEC for VMS?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/dnssec-for-vms/m-p/5123741#M56767</link>
      <description>Got a notification on openvms.org (&lt;A href="http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=08/08/12/8896640" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=08/08/12/8896640&lt;/A&gt; )&lt;BR /&gt;that HP responded on the issue ( &lt;A href="http://h71000.www7.hp.com/network/new.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://h71000.www7.hp.com/network/new.html&lt;/A&gt; ).A patched version of BIND will be available in the forthcoming ECO for more recent TCPIP versions. For those that require a quick solution, a specific patch is available.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:57:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/dnssec-for-vms/m-p/5123741#M56767</guid>
      <dc:creator>Willem Grooters</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-08-14T06:57:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

