Re: Security breach?

From	Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.security
Subject	Re: Security breach?
Followup-To	comp.os.linux.security
Date	2013-01-11 23:05 +0100
Organization	A noiseless patient Strider
Message-ID	<kcq2bm$m9a$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <slrnkevaie.4qm.BitTwister@wb.home.test> <i1OHs.32904$3S5.11697@newsfe18.iad> <XnsA1452A741B196MyBigKitty@216.196.97.131> <slrnkevu1b.sfk.BitTwister@wb.home.test> <XnsA145ABD95DD64MyBigKitty@216.196.97.131>

Followups directed to: comp.os.linux.security

Show all headers | View raw

On Friday 11 January 2013 22:53, Ohmster conveyed the following to 
comp.os.linux.security...

> Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> wrote in
> news:slrnkevu1b.sfk.BitTwister@wb.home.test:
> 
>> So your telling us you have been cracked for a few days.  :-(
>  
> Well yeah, although I did not know it for sure until now. I woke up a
> few days ago, found my Linux machine on, Firefox opened to craigslist,
> and an ad for an suv posted that was chock full of spam words was
> posted. Made no sense so I did nothing. Next day got an email from
> craigslist telling me "my ad" violated TOS and would be cancelled.

Although I'm not saying that it's impossible, a remote break-in into 
your machine typically will not fire up Firefox and have it bring up a 
site and submit correct data to forms at that particular website.  

It would be technically hard to achieve and would yield them nothing, 
since any purchases et al were supposed to be done by you, and thus 
billed to you and shipped to you.  Plus that they'd probably more likely 
use a non-X11-specific web browser for automated web visits, such as 
(e)lynx or links.

From what it looks like to me, it is more likely that someone has broken 
into your house and physically sat at your computer for a while, posting 
that junk to that website.  That, or you've got some nasty kids in your 
household, or you were very, very drunk one night. ;-)

-- 
= Aragorn =
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

Back to comp.os.linux.security | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

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