<?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 Re: Detecting overly long DNS Responses for CVE-2015-7547  glibc getaddrinfo() stack-based buffer ov in Custom Signatures</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/custom-signatures/detecting-overly-long-dns-responses-for-cve-2015-7547-glibc/m-p/73052#M41</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you for the quick response!&amp;nbsp; That is great news that there is a signature ready for install. Our vuln. mgmt team will breathe a sigh of relief &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I also checked the greater than/less than operators, but there were only two, very specific contexts for DNS available with those operators selected.&amp;nbsp; They did not lend themselves to evaluating Answers for A records.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2016 15:10:12 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mgentile</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-02-18T15:10:12Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Detecting overly long DNS Responses for CVE-2015-7547  glibc getaddrinfo() stack-based buffer over..</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/custom-signatures/detecting-overly-long-dns-responses-for-cve-2015-7547-glibc/m-p/73045#M39</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Objective: &lt;/STRONG&gt;I'm trying to write a custom vuln for detecting DNS responses with payloads greater than 512 bytes.&amp;nbsp; This is one of the recommended mitigations for &lt;A href="https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-02/msg00416.html" target="_self"&gt;CVE-2015-7547. &lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Editorial:&amp;nbsp; &lt;/STRONG&gt;I know that there are better places to apply mitigations, such as the clients themselves, caching nameservers, etc, but please for the sake of defense-in-depth and the academic discussion, please let's assume I want to do this mitigation on the PAN firewalls.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Problem:&amp;nbsp; &lt;/STRONG&gt;I can't seem to find enough bytes in a standard DNS response that are static and will meet the 7-byte minimum matching requirement.&amp;nbsp; I'm finding the &lt;EM&gt;dns-rsp-*&lt;/EM&gt; contexts to be extremely limiting in this exercise because the response packets (at least the ones I'm looking at) arevery compact and have a lot of information crammed into a small number of bytes.&amp;nbsp; Would it be better to try something using the &lt;EM&gt;unknown-rsp-udp&lt;/EM&gt; context and try to start matching there?&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt; Has anyone else tried matching on payload lengths?&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2016 14:44:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/custom-signatures/detecting-overly-long-dns-responses-for-cve-2015-7547-glibc/m-p/73045#M39</guid>
      <dc:creator>mgentile</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-02-18T14:44:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Detecting overly long DNS Responses for CVE-2015-7547  glibc getaddrinfo() stack-based buffer ov</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/custom-signatures/detecting-overly-long-dns-responses-for-cve-2015-7547-glibc/m-p/73051#M40</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Good morning, mgentile!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You are correct in your analysis of the DNS response contexts being difficult to identify static patterns on; this is a challenge I've faced myself writing custom signatures where what I am looking for is shorter than our static byte length restriction. This is a current limit of the pattern matching capabilities in the custom signature engine, and as such, signatures requiring this type of evaluation require a decoder based signature (which is something our engineers would write.)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The good news is that we released a signature in an emergency content (560) in the early hours this morning that protects from exploitation of this vulnerability under threat ID 38898.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Additionally, as a result of your inquiry, I will investigate whether or not a context is possible for DNS request/response lengths, outside of a pattern-match (Meaning, contexts available for mathematical evaluations, like equal to, greater than, less than.)&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2016 23:35:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/custom-signatures/detecting-overly-long-dns-responses-for-cve-2015-7547-glibc/m-p/73051#M40</guid>
      <dc:creator>rcole</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-02-18T23:35:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Detecting overly long DNS Responses for CVE-2015-7547  glibc getaddrinfo() stack-based buffer ov</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/custom-signatures/detecting-overly-long-dns-responses-for-cve-2015-7547-glibc/m-p/73052#M41</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you for the quick response!&amp;nbsp; That is great news that there is a signature ready for install. Our vuln. mgmt team will breathe a sigh of relief &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I also checked the greater than/less than operators, but there were only two, very specific contexts for DNS available with those operators selected.&amp;nbsp; They did not lend themselves to evaluating Answers for A records.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2016 15:10:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/custom-signatures/detecting-overly-long-dns-responses-for-cve-2015-7547-glibc/m-p/73052#M41</guid>
      <dc:creator>mgentile</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-02-18T15:10:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

