Description of problem: The loader uses a single static port as the source port for its DNS queries. This is port 32768 commonly also used by nfs statd on solaris. Some security setup require that this port be blocked. Most DNS resolvers use a random port for security issues (DNS spoofing) and avoiding firewalls. Would it be possible to make the loader increment the source port used on DNS resolver failures or use a random port? Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): All versions of Anaconda Steps to reproduce: Use tcpdump to get a packet capture of packets going to your DNS server while the loader is booting. It always uses port 32768 (0x8000).
Is there an RFC or reference implementation that defines this port randomization for DNS queries? Changing the product to Fedora Core as I will only be able to work on it there. If you need this issue addressed in RHEL, contact your TAM.
Its to prevent DNS spoofing...ah here we go, there is a draft RFC for it. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dnsext-forgery-resilience-00.txt I do need this in RHEL, but being an academic customer we can't have a TAM. Touchy subject...
We just use the functions in glibc to do the DNS lookups, so I think this will have to be something implemented on that end.
Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported against rawhide during the development of a Fedora release that is no longer maintained. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained. If this bug remains in NEEDINFO thirty (30) days from now, we will automatically close it. If you can reproduce this bug in a maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or rawhide), please change this bug to the respective version and change the status to ASSIGNED. (If you're unable to change the bug's version or status, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.) Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again.
This bug has been in NEEDINFO for more than 30 days since feedback was first requested. As a result we are closing it. If you can reproduce this bug in the future against a maintained Fedora version please feel free to reopen it against that version. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp