In BIND 9.8.5 -> 9.8.8, 9.9.3 -> 9.11.29, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.13, and versions BIND 9.9.3-S1 -> 9.11.29-S1 and 9.16.8-S1 -> 9.16.13-S1 of BIND 9 Supported Preview Edition, as well as release versions 9.17.0 -> 9.17.11 of the BIND 9.17 development branch, when a vulnerable version of named receives a malformed IXFR triggering the flaw described above, the named process will terminate due to a failed assertion the next time the transferred secondary zone is refreshed.

BIND servers are vulnerable if they are running an affected version and are configured to use GSS-TSIG features. In a configuration which uses BIND's default settings the vulnerable code path is not exposed, but a server can be rendered vulnerable by explicitly setting valid values for the tkey-gssapi-keytab or tkey-gssapi-credentialconfiguration options. Although the default configuration is not vulnerable, GSS-TSIG is frequently used in networks where BIND is integrated with Samba, as well as in mixed-server environments that combine BIND servers with Active Directory domain controllers. The most likely outcome of a successful exploitation of the vulnerability is a crash of the named process. However, remote code execution, while unproven, is theoretically possible. Affects: BIND 9.5.0 -> 9.11.27, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.11, and versions BIND 9.11.3-S1 -> 9.11.27-S1 and 9.16.8-S1 -> 9.16.11-S1 of BIND Supported Preview Edition. Also release versions 9.17.0 -> 9.17.1 of the BIND 9.17 developm…

In BIND 9.9.12 -> 9.9.13, 9.10.7 -> 9.10.8, 9.11.3 -> 9.11.21, 9.12.1 -> 9.16.5, 9.17.0 -> 9.17.3, also affects 9.9.12-S1 -> 9.9.13-S1, 9.11.3-S1 -> 9.11.21-S1 of the BIND 9 Supported Preview Edition, An attacker who has been granted privileges to change a specific subset of the zone's content could abuse these unintended additional privileges to update other contents of the zone.

In BIND 9.15.6 -> 9.16.5, 9.17.0 -> 9.17.3, An attacker who can establish a TCP connection with the server and send data on that connection can exploit this to trigger the assertion failure, causing the server to exit.

Using a specially-crafted message, an attacker may potentially cause a BIND server to reach an inconsistent state if the attacker knows (or successfully guesses) the name of a TSIG key used by the server. Since BIND, by default, configures a local session key even on servers whose configuration does not otherwise make use of it, almost all current BIND servers are vulnerable. In releases of BIND dating from March 2018 and after, an assertion check in tsig.c detects this inconsistent state and deliberately exits. Prior to the introduction of the check the server would continue operating in an inconsistent state, with potentially harmful results.

A race condition which may occur when discarding malformed packets can result in BIND exiting due to a REQUIRE assertion failure in dispatch.c. Versions affected: BIND 9.11.0 -> 9.11.7, 9.12.0 -> 9.12.4-P1, 9.14.0 -> 9.14.2. Also all releases of the BIND 9.13 development branch and version 9.15.0 of the BIND 9.15 development branch and BIND Supported Preview Edition versions 9.11.3-S1 -> 9.11.7-S1.

Change #4777 (introduced in October 2017) introduced an unforeseen issue in releases which were issued after that date, affecting which clients are permitted to make recursive queries to a BIND nameserver. The intended (and documented) behavior is that if an operator has not specified a value for the "allow-recursion" setting, it SHOULD default to one of the following: none, if "recursion no;" is set in named.conf; a value inherited from the "allow-query-cache" or "allow-query" settings IF "recursion yes;" (the default for that setting) AND match lists are explicitly set for "allow-query-cache" or "allow-query" (see the BIND9 Administrative Reference Manual section 6.2 for more details); or the intended default of "allow-recursion {localhost; localnets;};" if "recursion yes;" is in effect and no values are explicitly set for "allow-query-cache" or "allow-query". However, because of the regression introduced by change #4777, it is possible when "recursion yes;" is in effect and no matc…