Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.security > #227
| From | GangGreene <GangGreene@example.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.security |
| Subject | Re: Security breach? |
| Date | 2013-01-14 09:59 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <64jds9-dee.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com> (permalink) |
| References | (16 earlier) <zvKdnZ1Tgcu9cG_NnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@posted.lerostechnologies> <d89bs9-m3d.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com> <%YEIs.22142$EO2.21075@newsfe04.iad> <plkbs9-oad.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com> <8MHIs.37703$KS4.9224@newsfe11.iad> |
On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 23:51:32 +0000, unruh wrote: > On 2013-01-13, GangGreene <GangGreene@example.com> wrote: >> On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 20:40:27 +0000, unruh wrote: >> >>> On 2013-01-13, GangGreene <GangGreene@example.com> wrote: >>>> On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:21:35 -0500, Jim Beard wrote: >>>> >>>>>> If you find compromised system files then you know that you must >>>>>> format and re-install with out a doubt. At this time I would not >>>>>> care what other files have been installed. >>>>> >>>>> You swing from one extreme (ignore that crackers can use rpm) to the >>>>> other (any compromised system files means you must format and >>>>> re-install with out a doubt). I favor the format/re-install, but >>>>> after an attempt to track down what was actually done, to aid in >>>>> future defense if nothing else. >>>> >>>> No I am not going to go farther after knowing that system files are >>>> compromised. That is enough for me to format and re-install. >>> >>> Assuming you actually know that the change was not intentional. For >>> example, /etc/passwd is a system file. rpm -Va will tell you it has >>> changed. Do you reinstall? If you did you would spend all your time >>> reinstalling. >> >> I gave you the benefit of using your brain, are you saying that I >> should not have? > > You were the one who said that Beard should not use his brain, that > "after knowing that system files are compromised. that is enough for me > to format and re-install" after Beard suggested that perhaps a bit of > thought should go into it. Now you say that we should use our brain > before automatically reinstalling. Which is it? > > >> >>> And if the cracker came in via say the Java 7 breakin, would you keep >>> rinstalling the same broken java? >>> >>> >>> >>>> >> No I would install a more easily cracked version, again use your brain. > > But how would you know that they broke in via Java if you do not spend > time tracking done what was actually done? > If I only expose mail to the internet which service was compromised? Or If I only expose joomla to the internet which service was compromised? > > >> >> If you have the education of a two year old you should not be running >> services on the web. > > Agreed.
Back to comp.os.linux.security | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-10 23:29 -0600
Re: Security breach? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-11 05:59 +0000
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-11 06:10 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 02:45 -0600
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-11 20:44 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 15:06 -0600
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-11 22:26 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 16:45 -0600
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-12 00:24 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 19:34 -0600
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-12 02:16 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 21:04 -0600
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-12 05:44 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-12 16:29 -0600
Re: Security breach? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-13 03:01 +0000
Re: Security breach? GangGreene <GangGreene@example.com> - 2013-01-13 07:24 -0500
Re: Security breach? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-13 14:51 +0000
Re: Security breach? GangGreene <GangGreene@example.com> - 2013-01-13 10:45 -0500
Re: Security breach? Jim Beard <jdbeard@patriot.net> - 2013-01-13 12:21 -0500
Re: Security breach? GangGreene <GangGreene@example.com> - 2013-01-13 12:59 -0500
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-13 20:40 +0000
Re: Security breach? GangGreene <GangGreene@example.com> - 2013-01-13 16:14 -0500
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-13 23:51 +0000
Re: Security breach? GangGreene <GangGreene@example.com> - 2013-01-14 09:59 -0500
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-14 17:39 +0000
Re: Security breach? GangGreene <GangGreene@example.com> - 2013-01-14 16:16 -0500
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-14 21:48 +0000
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-13 20:35 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 17:05 -0600
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-12 00:26 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 03:10 -0600
Re: Security breach? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-11 11:31 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 15:53 -0600
Re: Security breach? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-01-11 23:05 +0100
Re: Security breach? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-01-11 22:14 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 16:47 -0600
Re: Security breach? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-12 00:26 +0000
Re: Security breach? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-01-12 09:23 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-12 16:31 -0600
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-12 16:36 -0600
Re: Security breach? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-01-13 14:45 +0100
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 16:39 -0600
Re: Security breach? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-12 00:08 +0000
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-11 20:50 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 15:19 -0600
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-11 22:30 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 16:49 -0600
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 02:36 -0600
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 02:52 -0600
Re: Security breach? "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2013-01-11 03:10 -0500
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 02:39 -0600
Re: Security breach? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-01-11 10:53 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 15:12 -0600
Re: Security breach? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-01-11 22:53 +0100
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 15:57 -0600
Re: Security breach? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-01-11 23:29 +0100
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 16:55 -0600
Re: Security breach? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-01-11 23:59 +0100
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 17:07 -0600
Re: Security breach? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-01-12 00:24 +0100
Re: Security breach? `blindshell' ...INFECTED (PORTS: 465) Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 17:48 -0600
Re: Security breach? `blindshell' ...INFECTED (PORTS: 465) Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 18:07 -0600
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-12 00:16 +0000
Re: Security breach? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-01-12 12:13 +0100
Re: Security breach? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-12 18:30 +0000
Re: Security breach? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-01-11 22:07 +0000
Re: Security breach? Ohmster <root@dev.nul> - 2013-01-11 17:22 -0600
csiph-web