From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jul 30 12:57:43 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69EEAD86
 for <stable@freebsd.org>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:57:43 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from feld@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.25])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DBCC212B
 for <stable@freebsd.org>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:57:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.44])
 by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D7C8219FD;
 Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:57:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from web3 ([10.202.2.213])
 by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:57:40 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
 messagingengine.com; h=message-id:from:to:cc:mime-version
 :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to:references
 :subject:date; s=smtpout; bh=SlOLMXvqGqHBWZPrpriMkImFb9k=; b=c4V
 I1CQck8VGZ1G+BviH6XwpecJpEuMU/LOgIf85zYb83CqarfFT4GhEP6WvWGfotUA
 LvqpwovmebFj0zOsfn/tYlwrOHnOGqVNdeVEYJ8DT3k+tNbgH9mE7N7iWciwOvu1
 ZZpmV/rkU2/4yQtMNATKP2pCe5/tOtZdQBLPWUpo=
Received: by web3.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix, from userid 99)
 id 334D5B01EF5; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:57:38 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <1375189058.1905.3236731.5689550E@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Sasl-Enc: 32f1lhE+J2eoH7njRJjTY6Hi8wAZCteg6xf/T9SpvEMt 1375189058
From: Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org>
To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-9e4be734
In-Reply-To: <201307301245.r6UCjuYs028255@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <CAO+PfDctepQY0mGH7H+gOSm4HJwhe-RCND+mxAArnRxpWiCsjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1375186900.23467.3223791.24CB348A@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <201307301245.r6UCjuYs028255@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Bind in FreeBSD, security advisories
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 07:57:38 -0500
Cc: stable@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:57:43 -0000

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013, at 7:45, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> 
> There are plenty of situations in which a remote recursive resolver is
> untrustworthy.  (Some would say any situation.)  It doesn't have to be
> BIND, but people do legitimately want the normal DNS diagnostic
> utilities, which sadly have been tied together with BIND for some
> years now.  (I don't know why anyone would ever use nslookup(1), but
> host(1) and dig(1) are pretty much essential.)
> 

If you're that paranoid about a remote resolver you'd have to be
paranoid about someone doing a MITM on your DNS lookups altogether,
since even having your own local recursor can't protect you from that as
99% of the web doesn't use DNSSEC. This will quickly turn into a
security yak-shaving contest, but I completely understand your
viewpoint.

I'd vote for keeping the bind utilities in base; I use them every day.
The ones provided with unbound work well, but finger memory...