Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register
Groups > comp.os.linux.security > #200
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.security |
|---|---|
| From | unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
| Subject | Re: Security breach? |
| References | (1 earlier) <slrnkevaie.4qm.BitTwister@wb.home.test> <i1OHs.32904$3S5.11697@newsfe18.iad> <XnsA14526347AB67MyBigKitty@216.196.97.131> <2R_Hs.22037$532.962@newsfe03.iad> <XnsA145B4AF1B265MyBigKitty@216.196.97.131> |
| Message-ID | <L22Is.64415$LS5.15558@newsfe10.iad> (permalink) |
| Date | 2013-01-12 00:24 +0000 |
On 2013-01-11, Ohmster <root@dev.nul> wrote: > unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote in news:2R_Hs.22037$532.962@newsfe03.iad: > > [..] >> The second is to wipe the drive and reinstall the operating system, >> making sure you give yourself and all users strong passwords, and you >> change all ssh authorized hosts accounts. Then you restore all your old >> user files (eg home directlry, or other programs you installed). Then >> search through for any suid programs, especially suid root programs. >> (eg I had one /tmp/bananas that sas a suid root shell) >> find / -perm /6000 > > Oh my, there is an awful lot of input. I will have to run this again and > capture it to a text file. Huh, chrome sandbox had suid? How come? Let me > run this more and find out how bad this is. > > I don't really know how to tell what should and should not have suid. I > know that no browser sandbox should have it, and all the /bin /sbin/ and > some others are alright, but there is a LOT of output from directories and > even hard drives that should not have suid. I have backups of previous > installations on other drives and they have suid too. /var/cache/.. has > suid. This is bad. Do you think I can upload this for examination or might > that not be prudent, unruh? > > Thank you unruh. You also have an rpm based machine. rpm -Va>/tmp/verify then look through that to see files which have changed since installation. ( third entry is a 5) Some should have changed (/etc/passwd for example) but some certainly should not. Note on the find command find / -perm /6000 -ls will give more information about the permissions and the files. The command looks for both suid and sgid files. The former are of course more dangerous. Not all may be owned by root, but most will be. >
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