adulau/pdns-qof
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/adulau/pdns-qof.git synced 2024-11-22 18:17:04 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

Processed output generated

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Alexandre Dulaunoy 2013-04-10 22:55:24 +02:00
parent 9b3e0f2d1e
commit a44b0594bd
1 changed files with 362 additions and 362 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

222
i-d/pdns-qof.txt
View file

@ -4,10 +4,12 @@
Internet Engineering Task Force Dulaunoy Internet Engineering Task Force Dulaunoy
Internet-Draft CIRCL Internet-Draft CIRCL
Intended status: Informational Kaplan Intended status: Informational Kaplan
Expires: July 15, 2013 CERT.at Expires: October 13, 2013 CERT.at
Vixie Vixie
ISC ISC
January 2013 hs Stern
Cisco
April 2013
Passive DNS - Common Output Format Passive DNS - Common Output Format
draft-ietf-dulaunoy-kaplan-pdns-cof-01 draft-ietf-dulaunoy-kaplan-pdns-cof-01
@ -20,7 +22,7 @@ Abstract
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft will expire on July 15, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on October 13, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
@ -41,32 +43,31 @@ Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Limitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Limitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Common Output Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Output Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. Overview and Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1.1. JSON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.2. Mandatory Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Mandatory Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.2.1. rrname . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.1. rrname . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2.2. rrtype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.2. rrtype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2.3. rdata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.3. rdata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2.4. time_first . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.4. time_first . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2.5. time_last . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.5. time_last . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.3. Optional Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Optional Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.3.1. count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5.1. count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5.2. bailiwick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Dulaunoy, Kaplan & Vixie info [Page 1] Dulaunoy, Kaplan, Vixie & Stern info [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013 Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title April 2013
6. Additional Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.3.2. bailiwick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6.1. x-sensor_id . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.4. Additional Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.4.1. sensor_id . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Appendix A. Additional Stuff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Appendix A. Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
@ -75,8 +76,8 @@ Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
Passive DNS replication, F Weimer - 17th Annual FIRST Conference on Passive DNS replication, F Weimer - 17th Annual FIRST Conference on
Computer Security. Since then multiple Passive DNS implementations Computer Security. Since then multiple Passive DNS implementations
evolved over time. Users of these Passive DNS servers query a server evolved over time. Users of these Passive DNS servers query a server
(often via Whois [Ref: WHOIS]), parse the results and process them in (often via Whois [Ref: WHOIS] or HTTP and ReST), parse the results
other applications. and process them in other applications.
There are multiple implementation of Passive DNS software. Users of There are multiple implementation of Passive DNS software. Users of
passive DNS query each implementation and aggregate the results for passive DNS query each implementation and aggregate the results for
@ -86,13 +87,15 @@ Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
output fields from each Passive DNS need to be consistent, we propose output fields from each Passive DNS need to be consistent, we propose
in this document a solution to commonly name each field along with in this document a solution to commonly name each field along with
their corresponding interpretation. The format format is following a their corresponding interpretation. The format format is following a
simple key-value structure. The benefit of having a consistent simple key-value structure in JSON [RFC4627] format. The benefit of
Passive DNS output format is that multiple client implementations can having a consistent Passive DNS output format is that multiple client
query different servers without having to have a separate parser for implementations can query different servers without having to have a
each individual server. [http://code.google.com/p/passive-dns-query- separate parser for each individual server. [http://code.google.com/
tool/] currently implements multiple parsers due to a lack of p/passive-dns-query-tool/] currently implements multiple parsers due
standardization. The document does not describe the protocol (e.g. to a lack of standardization. The document does not describe the
whois, HTTP REST or XMPP) used to query the Passive DNS. protocol (e.g. whois, HTTP REST or XMPP) nor the query format used
to query the Passive DNS. Neither does this document describe "pre-
recursor" Passive DNS Systems.
1.1. Requirements Language 1.1. Requirements Language
@ -105,58 +108,31 @@ Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
As a Passive DNS can include protection mechanisms for their As a Passive DNS can include protection mechanisms for their
operation, results might be different due to those protection operation, results might be different due to those protection
measures. These mechanisms filter out DNS answers if they fail some measures. These mechanisms filter out DNS answers if they fail some
Dulaunoy, Kaplan & Vixie info [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
criteria. The bailiwick algorithm (c.f. http://www.isc.org/files/ criteria. The bailiwick algorithm (c.f. http://www.isc.org/files/
passive_dns_hardening_handout.pdf) protects the Passive DNS Database passive_dns_hardening_handout.pdf) protects the Passive DNS Database
from cache poisoning attacks [ref: Dan Kaminsky]. Another from cache poisoning attacks [ref: Dan Kaminsky]. Another
limitiation that clients querying the database need to be aware of is limitiation that clients querying the database need to be aware of is
Dulaunoy, Kaplan, Vixie & Stern info [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title April 2013
that each query simply gets an snapshot-answer of the time of that each query simply gets an snapshot-answer of the time of
querying. Clients MUST NOT rely on consistent answers. querying. Clients MUST NOT rely on consistent answers.
3. Format 3. Common Output Format
A field is composed a key followed by a value separated by the single The formatting of the answer follows the JSON [RFC4627] format. The
':' character and a space before the value. The format is based on order of the fields is not significant for the same resource type.
the initial work done by Florian Weimer and the RIPE whois format That means, the same name tuple plus timing information identifies a
(ref:http://www.enyo.de/fw/software/dnslogger/whois.html). The order
of the fields is not significant for the same resource type. That
measn, the same name tuple plus timing information identifies a
unique answer per server. unique answer per server.
A sample output using the common format: 3.1. Overview and Example
rrname: www.foo.be
rrtype: AAAA
rdata: 2001:6f8:202:2df::2
time_first: 2010-07-26 13:04:01
time_last: 2012-02-06 09:59:00
count: 87
3.1. Output Format
Depending on the clients request, there might be one of three
different answers from the server: Whois (human readable) output
format (key-value), JSON [RFC4627] output and optionally Bind zone
file output format. XXX FIXME: how does the client select which
answer format he wants? XXX
3.1.1. JSON
The intent of this output format is to be easily parseable by The intent of this output format is to be easily parseable by
scripts. Every implementation SHOULD support the JSON output format. scripts. Every implementation MUST support the JSON output format.
A sample output using the JSON format: A sample output using the JSON format:
@ -168,24 +144,18 @@ Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
"time_last": "2013-02-05 17:34:03" } "time_last": "2013-02-05 17:34:03" }
... (separated by newline)... ... (separated by newline)...
4. Mandatory Fields 3.2. Mandatory Fields
Implementation MUST support all the mandatory fields. Implementation MUST support all the mandatory fields.
The tuple (rrtype,rrname,rdata) will always be unique within one The tuple (rrtype,rrname,rdata) will always be unique within one
answer per server. answer per server.
3.2.1. rrname
Dulaunoy, Kaplan & Vixie info [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
4.1. rrname
This field returns the name of the queried resource. This field returns the name of the queried resource.
4.2. rrtype 3.2.2. rrtype
This field returns the resource record type as seen by the passive This field returns the resource record type as seen by the passive
DNS. The key is rrtype and the value is in the interpreted record DNS. The key is rrtype and the value is in the interpreted record
@ -200,7 +170,16 @@ Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
addition, a client MUST be able to handle a decimal value (as addition, a client MUST be able to handle a decimal value (as
mentioned above) as answer. mentioned above) as answer.
4.3. rdata 3.2.3. rdata
Dulaunoy, Kaplan, Vixie & Stern info [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title April 2013
This field returns the data of the queried resource. In general, This field returns the data of the queried resource. In general,
this is to be interpreted as string. Depending on the rtype, this this is to be interpreted as string. Depending on the rtype, this
@ -212,73 +191,73 @@ Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
principle as described in RFC 3597 [RFC3597]. (binary stream if any? principle as described in RFC 3597 [RFC3597]. (binary stream if any?
base64?) base64?)
4.4. time_first 3.2.4. time_first
This field returns the first time that the record / unique tuple This field returns the first time that the record / unique tuple
(rrname, rrtype, rdata) has been seen by the passive DNS. The date is (rrname, rrtype, rdata) has been seen by the passive DNS. The date is
expressed in seconds (decimal ascii) since 1st of January 1970 (unix expressed in seconds (decimal ascii) since 1st of January 1970 (unix
timestamp). The time zone MUST be UTC. timestamp). The time zone MUST be UTC.
4.5. time_last 3.2.5. time_last
This field returns the last time that the unique tuple (rrname, This field returns the last time that the unique tuple (rrname,
rrtype, rdata) record has been seen by the passive DNS. The date is rrtype, rdata) record has been seen by the passive DNS. The date is
expressed in seconds (decimal ascii) since 1st of January 1970 (unix expressed in seconds (decimal ascii) since 1st of January 1970 (unix
timestamp). The time zone MUST be UTC.. timestamp). The time zone MUST be UTC..
5. Optional Fields 3.3. Optional Fields
Implementation SHOULD support one or more field. Implementation SHOULD support one or more field.
5.1. count 3.3.1. count
Specifies how many answers were received with the set of answers Specifies how many answers were received with the set of answers
(i.e. same data). The number of requests is expressed as a decimal (i.e. same data). The number of requests is expressed as a decimal
value. value.
Dulaunoy, Kaplan & Vixie info [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
Specifies the number of times this particular event denoted by the Specifies the number of times this particular event denoted by the
other type fields has been seen in the given time interval (between other type fields has been seen in the given time interval (between
time_last and time_first). Decimal number. time_last and time_first). Decimal number.
5.2. bailiwick 3.3.2. bailiwick
The bailiwick is the best estimate of the apex of the zone where this The bailiwick is the best estimate of the apex of the zone where this
data is authoritative. String. data is authoritative. String.
6. Additional Fields 3.4. Additional Fields
Implementations MAY support the following fields: Implementations MAY support the following fields:
6.1. x-sensor_id 3.4.1. sensor_id
This field returns the sensor information where the record was seen. This field returns the sensor information where the record was seen.
The sensor_id is an opaque byte string as defined by RFC 5001 in The sensor_id is an opaque byte string as defined by RFC 5001 in
section 2.3 [RFC5001]. section 2.3 [RFC5001].
7. Acknowledgements 4. Acknowledgements
Dulaunoy, Kaplan, Vixie & Stern info [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title April 2013
Thanks to the Passive DNS developers who contributed to the document. Thanks to the Passive DNS developers who contributed to the document.
8. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA. This memo includes no request to IANA.
9. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
In some cases, Passive DNS output might contain confidential In some cases, Passive DNS output might contain confidential
information and its access might be restricted. When an user is information and its access might be restricted. When an user is
querying multiple Passive DNS and aggregating the data, the querying multiple Passive DNS and aggregating the data, the
sensitivity of the data must be considered. sensitivity of the data must be considered.
10. References 7. References
10.1. Normative References 7.1. Normative References
[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", [RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987. STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.
@ -298,14 +277,9 @@ Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
[RFC5001] Austein, R., "DNS Name Server Identifier (NSID) Option", [RFC5001] Austein, R., "DNS Name Server Identifier (NSID) Option",
RFC 5001, August 2007. RFC 5001, August 2007.
Dulaunoy, Kaplan & Vixie info [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
[min_ref] authSurName, authInitials, "Minimal Reference", 2006. [min_ref] authSurName, authInitials, "Minimal Reference", 2006.
10.2. Informative References 7.2. Informative References
[I-D.narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis] [I-D.narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis]
Narten, T and H Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an Narten, T and H Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
@ -320,10 +294,15 @@ Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title January 2013
Text on Security Considerations", BCP 72, RFC 3552, July Text on Security Considerations", BCP 72, RFC 3552, July
2003. 2003.
Appendix A. Additional Stuff Appendix A. Appendix
This becomes an Appendix. This becomes an Appendix.
Dulaunoy, Kaplan, Vixie & Stern info [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title April 2013
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Alexandre Dulaunoy Alexandre Dulaunoy
@ -355,8 +334,29 @@ Authors' Addresses
URI: / URI: /
Henry Stern
Cisco
1741 Brunswick Street, Suite 500
Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3X8
Canada
Phone: +1 408 922 4555
Email: hestern@cisco.com
URI: http://www.cisco.com/security
Dulaunoy, Kaplan & Vixie info [Page 6]
Dulaunoy, Kaplan, Vixie & Stern info [Page 6]