| 1 |
Uwe Thiem <uwix <at> iway.na> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
Are there any security reasons that I should not run the secondary (Bind) name |
| 5 |
server on the firewall (iptables) directly? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> Well, security holes have been discovered in bind in the past - and |
| 8 |
> there are no reasons to assume none will be found in the future. |
| 9 |
> Once your firewall is compromised, your whole network is under |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> Though the risk is probably small, you can avoid it easily. Rund bind |
| 12 |
> on one of the boxes behind your firewall. Forward port 53 from your |
| 13 |
> fw to that box. Announce your FW as the secondary name server. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Yep. |
| 17 |
That's what I was thinking too. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
thanks for confirming what I was leaning towards. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
James |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives