After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 750941 - nmcheck.gnome.org should have a DNS TTL of 0
nmcheck.gnome.org should have a DNS TTL of 0
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: website
Classification: Infrastructure
Component: www.gnome.org
current
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: GNOME Web maintainers
GNOME Web maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2015-06-14 16:53 UTC by Michael Catanzaro
Modified: 2016-12-07 18:54 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Michael Catanzaro 2015-06-14 16:53:52 UTC
From discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-June/211406.html which can be summed up in two quotes:

"If the captive portal uses the system's DNS, and the system has cached
www.gnome.org from when you were on a previous network, your captive
portal check might use a cached DNS resolve and try to use an HTTP
connection to a blocked IP address, because the local forged DNS answer
to the local hotspot IP never got triggered. So if you use www.gnome.org,
you have to make sure the portal software is not using the system DNS cache
for DNS lookups. So it is better for captive portal login to use
hotspot-nocache.fedoraproject.org, which will always have a TTL of 0,
so it will not cached." (Note: not using the system DNS cache is not possible with WebKitGTK+ and will probably never be possible.)

"[I]f the portal uses DNS hijacking only and does not hijack TCP connections to the real www.gnome.org, and we attempt to open a TCP session to the real www.gnome.org, and the portal is only expecting us to visit a different host due to its DNS hijacking, then I understand that we're out of luck and the portal's login page will never show." (Note: our current behavior is exactly what web browser would probably do. This is an opportunity to make our portal helper more reliable than a web browser.)

I guess the best way to solve this without hardcoding the Fedora URL upstream is make the URL configurable at build time.
Comment 1 Rui Matos 2015-08-28 15:20:33 UTC
(In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #0)
> From discussion at
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-June/211406.html which
> can be summed up in two quotes:
> 
> "If the captive portal uses the system's DNS, and the system has cached
> www.gnome.org from when you were on a previous network, your captive
> portal check might use a cached DNS resolve and try to use an HTTP
> connection to a blocked IP address, because the local forged DNS answer
> to the local hotspot IP never got triggered. So if you use www.gnome.org,
> you have to make sure the portal software is not using the system DNS cache
> for DNS lookups. So it is better for captive portal login to use
> hotspot-nocache.fedoraproject.org, which will always have a TTL of 0,
> so it will not cached." (Note: not using the system DNS cache is not
> possible with WebKitGTK+ and will probably never be possible.)

If the system DNS cache is the regular glibc resolver using /etc/resolv.conf than this isn't an issue since such a cache can only exist in a process scope and thus any new instance starts with an empty cache.

If the system DNS cache is implemented by a local resolver daemon (i.e. /etc/resolv.conf has a single static entry 127.0.0.1:53) then wouldn't it be safer (on a systemwide level) if said daemon was told to clear the cache whenever the local host gets a new IP address configured?
Comment 2 Michael Catanzaro 2015-08-28 16:06:34 UTC
(In reply to Rui Matos from comment #1) 
> If the system DNS cache is implemented by a local resolver daemon

which is what we're doing for F23

> (i.e.
> /etc/resolv.conf has a single static entry 127.0.0.1:53) then wouldn't it be
> safer (on a systemwide level) if said daemon was told to clear the cache
> whenever the local host gets a new IP address configured?

*Shrug.* It would have to be implemented :)
Comment 3 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-05 14:17:16 UTC
We use nmcheck.gnome.org nowadays.
Comment 4 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-05 14:22:16 UTC
Note: this is not a problem with www.gnome.org anymore, but there is no Bugzilla component for nmcheck.gnome.org.
Comment 5 Andrea Veri 2016-12-07 18:25:10 UTC
TTL of nmcheck.gnome.org is now zero as requested.
Comment 6 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-07 18:54:32 UTC
OK, FIXED then, thanks Andrea!