Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection attack

2014-09-28 Thread Ken Hohhof via Af
You are preaching rather than listening.

What if it is an appliance with a distribution that is frozen in time on 
CentOS4 with no updates.  Note that RHEL4 updates are only available via paid 
extended support, and CentOS4 is EOL.  Doing a yum update on a CentOS4 box 
won’t get you anywhere, and I don’t believe RHEL4 even used yum, it used Redhat 
Network to get RPMs.  All my new stuff on CentOS5 and 6 has been updated.

What I was asking for an opinion on was whether the RPM that Oracle made 
available was likely to work, or to brick the box.  Keep in mind that bricking 
your command shell could be difficult to recover from, especially on a headless 
appliance at a remote site.  I’m guessing that creating another user with a 
different shell like csh or ksh might offer a failsafe.  I would have to see 
what other shells are available on the device.

So this is a Tyan kiosk type server with BlueQuartz installed, long ago 
defunct.  Nuonce was maintaining repositories but stopped a long time ago.

Other people are going to face similar situations.  Not every server is built 
from scratch loading the OS and then the applications.  Sometimes you use an 
all-in-one install disk, like CactiEZ or some of the Asterisk/FreePBX 
distributions.  I’m evaluating the PBX appliances from Grandstream, clearly 
they run Asterisk and probably Linux under the hood, but you can’t even get to 
the command line, so any software updates would have to be from the web GUI 
with updates from Grandstream.  So I’m thinking if that’s a problem, being 
totally dependent on the vendor, I guess stuff like routers are the same.  But 
you can’t just go and do a yum update on everything that has Linux inside, or 
recompile the source code with the patch and install it yourself, even assuming 
you feel comfortable doing that.


From: Shayne Lebrun via Af 
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection 
attack

Quite honestly, who cares?  There’s zero downside to closing the security hole.

 

Hopefully you’re closing all your other security holes too, especially for 
things like DNS or NTP that are almost public facing by default.  Why not close 
this one at the same time?

 

What happens in six months when you, or somebody, stick another service on that 
machine?

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:38 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables codeinjection 
attack

 

Why?

 

Take the case of a dedicated server that only does let’s say DHCP or DNS or 
NTP.  It only has one port open to the Internet, and there’s no way to get to a 
bash shell via that port.  How the hell is someone going to pass an environment 
variable to a bash shell on that server?

 

 

 

From: Shayne Lebrun via Af 

Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 8:40 AM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables codeinjection 
attack

 

Ø  I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would 
need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a shell, or 
find a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment variable to bash 
for you.

 

Please don’t think like this.  

 

From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 1:38 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables code 
injection attack

 

So maybe I won’t do that.

 

The newer servers where I could just do a yum update have been straightforward, 
as you’d expect.

 

I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would need 
to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a shell, or find 
a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment variable to bash for 
you.

 

From: Jeremy via Af 

Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 12:13 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables code 
injection attack

 

Our webserver was vulnerable.  Tried to fix it without backing it up 
firstyeah, I know.  Lost it all.  So I guess I will be building a new 
website from my 2013 backup this weekend.  It's a good thing I carpet bombed my 
website to prevent anyone from messing with it!

 

On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Ken Hohhof via Af  wrote:

Unfortunately I have a couple old servers running RHEL4 and one old BlueQuartz 
webhosting appliance based on CentOS4.  I’m a little reluctant to try compiling 
the patch myself unless I switch to a difference shell first, if I screw up my 
command shell it might be difficult to fix.

 

Any guess if I’d be safe using the RPM cited in this thread:

http://serverfault.com/questions/631055/how-do-i-patch-rhel-4-for-the-bash-vulnerabilities-in-cve-2014-6271-and-cve

Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection attack

2014-09-28 Thread That One Guy via Af
Its times like these I wish I had learned to code.
i would write a malware to infect all the connected devices, refrigerators,
light bulbs, cameras, well pump monitors, all of them, just sitting behind
consumer grade routers infected, waiting, calling home now and then to get
their updates, helping to build a database of what I have and how to
exploit it. Then one day I would pull the trigger, penises on every
computer screen in the world. It would be beautiful, I would have a tear in
my eye.

On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 8:55 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af  wrote:

>   You are preaching rather than listening.
>
> What if it is an appliance with a distribution that is frozen in time on
> CentOS4 with no updates.  Note that RHEL4 updates are only available via
> paid extended support, and CentOS4 is EOL.  Doing a yum update on a CentOS4
> box won’t get you anywhere, and I don’t believe RHEL4 even used yum, it
> used Redhat Network to get RPMs.  All my new stuff on CentOS5 and 6 has
> been updated.
>
> What I was asking for an opinion on was whether the RPM that Oracle made
> available was likely to work, or to brick the box.  Keep in mind that
> bricking your command shell could be difficult to recover from, especially
> on a headless appliance at a remote site.  I’m guessing that creating
> another user with a different shell like csh or ksh might offer a
> failsafe.  I would have to see what other shells are available on the
> device.
>
> So this is a Tyan kiosk type server with BlueQuartz installed, long ago
> defunct.  Nuonce was maintaining repositories but stopped a long time ago.
>
> Other people are going to face similar situations.  Not every server is
> built from scratch loading the OS and then the applications.  Sometimes you
> use an all-in-one install disk, like CactiEZ or some of the
> Asterisk/FreePBX distributions.  I’m evaluating the PBX appliances from
> Grandstream, clearly they run Asterisk and probably Linux under the hood,
> but you can’t even get to the command line, so any software updates would
> have to be from the web GUI with updates from Grandstream.  So I’m thinking
> if that’s a problem, being totally dependent on the vendor, I guess stuff
> like routers are the same.  But you can’t just go and do a yum update on
> everything that has Linux inside, or recompile the source code with the
> patch and install it yourself, even assuming you feel comfortable doing
> that.
>
>
>  *From:* Shayne Lebrun via Af 
> *Sent:* Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:00 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment
> variablescodeinjection attack
>
>
> Quite honestly, who cares?  There’s zero downside to closing the security
> hole.
>
>
>
> Hopefully you’re closing all your other security holes too, especially for
> things like DNS or NTP that are almost public facing by default.  Why not
> close this one at the same time?
>
>
>
> What happens in six months when you, or somebody, stick another service on
> that machine?
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] *On Behalf
> Of *Ken Hohhof via Af
> *Sent:* Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:38 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables
> codeinjection attack
>
>
>
> Why?
>
>
>
> Take the case of a dedicated server that only does let’s say DHCP or DNS
> or NTP.  It only has one port open to the Internet, and there’s no way to
> get to a bash shell via that port.  How the hell is someone going to pass
> an environment variable to a bash shell on that server?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Shayne Lebrun via Af 
>
> *Sent:* Sunday, September 28, 2014 8:40 AM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables
> codeinjection attack
>
>
>
> Ø  I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you
> would need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a
> shell, or find a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment
> variable to bash for you.
>
>
>
> Please don’t think like this.
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com
> ] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof via
> Af
> *Sent:* Saturday, September 27, 2014 1:38 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables code
> injection attack
>
>
>
> So maybe I won’t do that.
>
>
>
> The newer servers where I could just do a yum update have been
> straightforward, as you’d expect.
>
>
>
> I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would
> need to either authenticate (at least as a 

Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection attack

2014-09-28 Thread Josh Reynolds via Af
You're right, yum updates are probably a problem for those pesky 
RedHat/Centos distros.


Move to debian :P

Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>

On 09/28/2014 05:55 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote:

You are preaching rather than listening.
What if it is an appliance with a distribution that is frozen in time 
on CentOS4 with no updates.  Note that RHEL4 updates are only 
available via paid extended support, and CentOS4 is EOL.  Doing a yum 
update on a CentOS4 box won’t get you anywhere, and I don’t believe 
RHEL4 even used yum, it used Redhat Network to get RPMs.  All my new 
stuff on CentOS5 and 6 has been updated.
What I was asking for an opinion on was whether the RPM that Oracle 
made available was likely to work, or to brick the box.  Keep in mind 
that bricking your command shell could be difficult to recover from, 
especially on a headless appliance at a remote site.  I’m guessing 
that creating another user with a different shell like csh or ksh 
might offer a failsafe.  I would have to see what other shells are 
available on the device.
So this is a Tyan kiosk type server with BlueQuartz installed, long 
ago defunct.  Nuonce was maintaining repositories but stopped a long 
time ago.
Other people are going to face similar situations.  Not every server 
is built from scratch loading the OS and then the applications.  
Sometimes you use an all-in-one install disk, like CactiEZ or some of 
the Asterisk/FreePBX distributions.  I’m evaluating the PBX appliances 
from Grandstream, clearly they run Asterisk and probably Linux under 
the hood, but you can’t even get to the command line, so any software 
updates would have to be from the web GUI with updates from 
Grandstream.  So I’m thinking if that’s a problem, being totally 
dependent on the vendor, I guess stuff like routers are the same.  But 
you can’t just go and do a yum update on everything that has Linux 
inside, or recompile the source code with the patch and install it 
yourself, even assuming you feel comfortable doing that.

*From:* Shayne Lebrun via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Sent:* Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:00 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment 
variablescodeinjection attack


Quite honestly, who cares?  There’s zero downside to closing the 
security hole.


Hopefully you’re closing all your other security holes too, especially 
for things like DNS or NTP that are almost public facing by default.  
Why not close this one at the same time?


What happens in six months when you, or somebody, stick another 
service on that machine?


*From:*Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] *On Behalf 
Of *Ken Hohhof via Af

*Sent:* Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:38 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables 
codeinjection attack


Why?

Take the case of a dedicated server that only does let’s say DHCP or 
DNS or NTP.  It only has one port open to the Internet, and there’s no 
way to get to a bash shell via that port.  How the hell is someone 
going to pass an environment variable to a bash shell on that server?


*From:*Shayne Lebrun via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>

*Sent:*Sunday, September 28, 2014 8:40 AM

*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables 
codeinjection attack


ØI think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you 
would need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get 
to a shell, or find a publicly exposed script that will pass an 
environment variable to bash for you.


Please don’t think like this.

*From:*Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] *On Behalf 
Of *Ken Hohhof via Af

*Sent:* Saturday, September 27, 2014 1:38 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables 
code injection attack


So maybe I won’t do that.

The newer servers where I could just do a yum update have been 
straightforward, as you’d expect.


I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you 
would need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get 
to a shell, or find a publicly exposed script that will pass an 
environment variable to bash for you.


*From:*Jeremy via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>

*Sent:*Saturday, September 27, 2014 12:13 PM

*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables 
code injection attack


Our webserver was vulnerable.  Tried to fix it without backing it up 
firstyeah, I know. Lost it all.  So I guess I will be building a 
new website from my 2013 backup this weekend.  It's a good thing I 
carpet bombed my website to prevent anyone from messing with it!


On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Ken Hohhof via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection attack

2014-09-28 Thread Ken Hohhof via Af
I’ll bet you have a favorite brand of gasoline too.

From: Josh Reynolds via Af 
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:30 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection 
attack

You're right, yum updates are probably a problem for those pesky RedHat/Centos 
distros.

Move to debian :P

Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com

On 09/28/2014 05:55 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote:

  You are preaching rather than listening.

  What if it is an appliance with a distribution that is frozen in time on 
CentOS4 with no updates.  Note that RHEL4 updates are only available via paid 
extended support, and CentOS4 is EOL.  Doing a yum update on a CentOS4 box 
won’t get you anywhere, and I don’t believe RHEL4 even used yum, it used Redhat 
Network to get RPMs.  All my new stuff on CentOS5 and 6 has been updated.

  What I was asking for an opinion on was whether the RPM that Oracle made 
available was likely to work, or to brick the box.  Keep in mind that bricking 
your command shell could be difficult to recover from, especially on a headless 
appliance at a remote site.  I’m guessing that creating another user with a 
different shell like csh or ksh might offer a failsafe.  I would have to see 
what other shells are available on the device.

  So this is a Tyan kiosk type server with BlueQuartz installed, long ago 
defunct.  Nuonce was maintaining repositories but stopped a long time ago.

  Other people are going to face similar situations.  Not every server is built 
from scratch loading the OS and then the applications.  Sometimes you use an 
all-in-one install disk, like CactiEZ or some of the Asterisk/FreePBX 
distributions.  I’m evaluating the PBX appliances from Grandstream, clearly 
they run Asterisk and probably Linux under the hood, but you can’t even get to 
the command line, so any software updates would have to be from the web GUI 
with updates from Grandstream.  So I’m thinking if that’s a problem, being 
totally dependent on the vendor, I guess stuff like routers are the same.  But 
you can’t just go and do a yum update on everything that has Linux inside, or 
recompile the source code with the patch and install it yourself, even assuming 
you feel comfortable doing that.


  From: Shayne Lebrun via Af 
  Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:00 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment 
variablescodeinjection attack

  Quite honestly, who cares?  There’s zero downside to closing the security 
hole.

   

  Hopefully you’re closing all your other security holes too, especially for 
things like DNS or NTP that are almost public facing by default.  Why not close 
this one at the same time?

   

  What happens in six months when you, or somebody, stick another service on 
that machine?

   

   

  From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
  Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:38 AM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables 
codeinjection attack

   

  Why?

   

  Take the case of a dedicated server that only does let’s say DHCP or DNS or 
NTP.  It only has one port open to the Internet, and there’s no way to get to a 
bash shell via that port.  How the hell is someone going to pass an environment 
variable to a bash shell on that server?

   

   

   

  From: Shayne Lebrun via Af 

  Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 8:40 AM

  To: af@afmug.com 

  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables 
codeinjection attack

   

  Ø  I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would 
need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a shell, or 
find a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment variable to bash 
for you.

   

  Please don’t think like this.  

   

  From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
  Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 1:38 PM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables code 
injection attack

   

  So maybe I won’t do that.

   

  The newer servers where I could just do a yum update have been 
straightforward, as you’d expect.

   

  I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would 
need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a shell, or 
find a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment variable to bash 
for you.

   

  From: Jeremy via Af 

  Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 12:13 PM

  To: af@afmug.com 

  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables code 
injection attack

   

  Our webserver was vulnerable.  Tried to fix it without backing it up 
firstyeah, I know.  Lost it all.  So I guess I will be building a new 
website from my 2013 backup this weekend.  It's a good thing I carpet bombed my 
website 

Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection attack

2014-09-28 Thread Josh Reynolds via Af

Nope, I just use whatever works :)

Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>

On 09/28/2014 08:14 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote:

I’ll bet you have a favorite brand of gasoline too.
*From:* Josh Reynolds via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Sent:* Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:30 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment 
variablescodeinjection attack
You're right, yum updates are probably a problem for those pesky 
RedHat/Centos distros.


Move to debian :P

Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>

On 09/28/2014 05:55 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote:

You are preaching rather than listening.
What if it is an appliance with a distribution that is frozen in time 
on CentOS4 with no updates. Note that RHEL4 updates are only 
available via paid extended support, and CentOS4 is EOL.  Doing a yum 
update on a CentOS4 box won’t get you anywhere, and I don’t believe 
RHEL4 even used yum, it used Redhat Network to get RPMs.  All my new 
stuff on CentOS5 and 6 has been updated.
What I was asking for an opinion on was whether the RPM that Oracle 
made available was likely to work, or to brick the box.  Keep in mind 
that bricking your command shell could be difficult to recover from, 
especially on a headless appliance at a remote site.  I’m guessing 
that creating another user with a different shell like csh or ksh 
might offer a failsafe.  I would have to see what other shells are 
available on the device.
So this is a Tyan kiosk type server with BlueQuartz installed, long 
ago defunct.  Nuonce was maintaining repositories but stopped a long 
time ago.
Other people are going to face similar situations.  Not every server 
is built from scratch loading the OS and then the applications.  
Sometimes you use an all-in-one install disk, like CactiEZ or some of 
the Asterisk/FreePBX distributions.  I’m evaluating the PBX 
appliances from Grandstream, clearly they run Asterisk and probably 
Linux under the hood, but you can’t even get to the command line, so 
any software updates would have to be from the web GUI with updates 
from Grandstream.  So I’m thinking if that’s a problem, being totally 
dependent on the vendor, I guess stuff like routers are the same.  
But you can’t just go and do a yum update on everything that has 
Linux inside, or recompile the source code with the patch and install 
it yourself, even assuming you feel comfortable doing that.

*From:* Shayne Lebrun via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Sent:* Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:00 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment 
variablescodeinjection attack


Quite honestly, who cares? There’s zero downside to closing the 
security hole.


Hopefully you’re closing all your other security holes too, 
especially for things like DNS or NTP that are almost public facing 
by default.  Why not close this one at the same time?


What happens in six months when you, or somebody, stick another 
service on that machine?


*From:*Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] *On 
Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof via Af

*Sent:* Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:38 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables 
codeinjection attack


Why?

Take the case of a dedicated server that only does let’s say DHCP or 
DNS or NTP.  It only has one port open to the Internet, and there’s 
no way to get to a bash shell via that port.  How the hell is someone 
going to pass an environment variable to a bash shell on that server?


*From:*Shayne Lebrun via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>

*Sent:*Sunday, September 28, 2014 8:40 AM

*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables 
codeinjection attack


ØI think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you 
would need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get 
to a shell, or find a publicly exposed script that will pass an 
environment variable to bash for you.


Please don’t think like this.

*From:*Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] *On 
Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof via Af

*Sent:* Saturday, September 27, 2014 1:38 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables 
code injection attack


So maybe I won’t do that.

The newer servers where I could just do a yum update have been 
straightforward, as you’d expect.


I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you 
would need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get 
to a shell, or find a publicly exposed script that will pass an 
environment variable to bash for you.


*From:*Jeremy via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>

*Sent:*Saturday, September 27, 2014 12:13 PM

*To:*af@afmu

Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection attack

2014-09-29 Thread Shayne Lebrun via Af
Originally, I responded to this:

Ø  “I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would 
need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a shell, or 
find a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment variable to bash 
for you.

And asked you not to think about security in those terms.  Don’t assume you 
understand all the possible attack vectors, don’t assume that because certain 
other things need to happen, you’re invulnerable, etc etc.  When you get right 
down to it, though, UNIX really wants to land you at a shell, and bash is the 
default shell in a lot of places.

 

You’re certainly listed a whole bunch of issues in the software world at large, 
dedicated applicances, etc etc and I certainly sympathize with a lot of the 
issues you’ve raised.

 

Of course, the slightly less empathetic sysadmin in me says ‘too bad; you put 
public-facing server on the Internet, you have an obligation, and a 
responsibility to maintain it properly.’  I argue in my head with him A LOT.

 

Yes, absolutely, you can mitigate the issues you raised in your last email to a 
very reasonable degree with proper firewalling, internal processes, etc etc.  
And it sounds like you’re cognizant of the need to do that, so that’s great too.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 9:55 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection 
attack

 

You are preaching rather than listening.

 

What if it is an appliance with a distribution that is frozen in time on 
CentOS4 with no updates.  Note that RHEL4 updates are only available via paid 
extended support, and CentOS4 is EOL.  Doing a yum update on a CentOS4 box 
won’t get you anywhere, and I don’t believe RHEL4 even used yum, it used Redhat 
Network to get RPMs.  All my new stuff on CentOS5 and 6 has been updated.

 

What I was asking for an opinion on was whether the RPM that Oracle made 
available was likely to work, or to brick the box.  Keep in mind that bricking 
your command shell could be difficult to recover from, especially on a headless 
appliance at a remote site.  I’m guessing that creating another user with a 
different shell like csh or ksh might offer a failsafe.  I would have to see 
what other shells are available on the device.

 

So this is a Tyan kiosk type server with BlueQuartz installed, long ago 
defunct.  Nuonce was maintaining repositories but stopped a long time ago.

 

Other people are going to face similar situations.  Not every server is built 
from scratch loading the OS and then the applications.  Sometimes you use an 
all-in-one install disk, like CactiEZ or some of the Asterisk/FreePBX 
distributions.  I’m evaluating the PBX appliances from Grandstream, clearly 
they run Asterisk and probably Linux under the hood, but you can’t even get to 
the command line, so any software updates would have to be from the web GUI 
with updates from Grandstream.  So I’m thinking if that’s a problem, being 
totally dependent on the vendor, I guess stuff like routers are the same.  But 
you can’t just go and do a yum update on everything that has Linux inside, or 
recompile the source code with the patch and install it yourself, even assuming 
you feel comfortable doing that.

 

 

From: Shayne Lebrun via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>  

Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:00 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection 
attack

 

Quite honestly, who cares?  There’s zero downside to closing the security hole.

 

Hopefully you’re closing all your other security holes too, especially for 
things like DNS or NTP that are almost public facing by default.  Why not close 
this one at the same time?

 

What happens in six months when you, or somebody, stick another service on that 
machine?

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:38 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables codeinjection 
attack

 

Why?

 

Take the case of a dedicated server that only does let’s say DHCP or DNS or 
NTP.  It only has one port open to the Internet, and there’s no way to get to a 
bash shell via that port.  How the hell is someone going to pass an environment 
variable to a bash shell on that server?

 

 

 

From: Shayne Lebrun via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>  

Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 8:40 AM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables codeinjection 
attack

 

Ø  I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would 
need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a shell, or 
find a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment variable to bash 
for you.

 

Please don’t think like this.  

Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection attack

2014-09-29 Thread Shayne Lebrun via Af
Oh, and you mentioned a BlueQuartz server.  Looks like there are options, 
including: http://www.blueonyx.it/, which seems to include migrating from 
BlueQuartz.

 

From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 9:55 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection 
attack

 

You are preaching rather than listening.

 

What if it is an appliance with a distribution that is frozen in time on 
CentOS4 with no updates.  Note that RHEL4 updates are only available via paid 
extended support, and CentOS4 is EOL.  Doing a yum update on a CentOS4 box 
won’t get you anywhere, and I don’t believe RHEL4 even used yum, it used Redhat 
Network to get RPMs.  All my new stuff on CentOS5 and 6 has been updated.

 

What I was asking for an opinion on was whether the RPM that Oracle made 
available was likely to work, or to brick the box.  Keep in mind that bricking 
your command shell could be difficult to recover from, especially on a headless 
appliance at a remote site.  I’m guessing that creating another user with a 
different shell like csh or ksh might offer a failsafe.  I would have to see 
what other shells are available on the device.

 

So this is a Tyan kiosk type server with BlueQuartz installed, long ago 
defunct.  Nuonce was maintaining repositories but stopped a long time ago.

 

Other people are going to face similar situations.  Not every server is built 
from scratch loading the OS and then the applications.  Sometimes you use an 
all-in-one install disk, like CactiEZ or some of the Asterisk/FreePBX 
distributions.  I’m evaluating the PBX appliances from Grandstream, clearly 
they run Asterisk and probably Linux under the hood, but you can’t even get to 
the command line, so any software updates would have to be from the web GUI 
with updates from Grandstream.  So I’m thinking if that’s a problem, being 
totally dependent on the vendor, I guess stuff like routers are the same.  But 
you can’t just go and do a yum update on everything that has Linux inside, or 
recompile the source code with the patch and install it yourself, even assuming 
you feel comfortable doing that.

 

 

From: Shayne Lebrun via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>  

Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:00 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection 
attack

 

Quite honestly, who cares?  There’s zero downside to closing the security hole.

 

Hopefully you’re closing all your other security holes too, especially for 
things like DNS or NTP that are almost public facing by default.  Why not close 
this one at the same time?

 

What happens in six months when you, or somebody, stick another service on that 
machine?

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:38 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables codeinjection 
attack

 

Why?

 

Take the case of a dedicated server that only does let’s say DHCP or DNS or 
NTP.  It only has one port open to the Internet, and there’s no way to get to a 
bash shell via that port.  How the hell is someone going to pass an environment 
variable to a bash shell on that server?

 

 

 

From: Shayne Lebrun via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>  

Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 8:40 AM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables codeinjection 
attack

 

Ø  I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would 
need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a shell, or 
find a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment variable to bash 
for you.

 

Please don’t think like this.  

 

From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 1:38 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables code 
injection attack

 

So maybe I won’t do that.

 

The newer servers where I could just do a yum update have been straightforward, 
as you’d expect.

 

I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would need 
to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a shell, or find 
a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment variable to bash for 
you.

 

From: Jeremy via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com>  

Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 12:13 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables code 
injection attack

 

Our webserver was vulnerable.  Tried to fix it without backing it up 
firstyeah, I know.  Lost it all.  So I guess I will be building a new 
website from my 2013 backup this weekend.  It's a good thing I carpet bombed my 
website to prevent anyone from messing with it!

 

On Sat, Sep 27

Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection attack

2014-09-29 Thread Matt via Af
Only time I have had issues with yum update is when there are third
party repositories.


On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 10:30 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af  wrote:
> You're right, yum updates are probably a problem for those pesky
> RedHat/Centos distros.
>
> Move to debian :P
>
> Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
> SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com
>
> On 09/28/2014 05:55 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote:
>
> You are preaching rather than listening.
>
> What if it is an appliance with a distribution that is frozen in time on
> CentOS4 with no updates.  Note that RHEL4 updates are only available via
> paid extended support, and CentOS4 is EOL.  Doing a yum update on a CentOS4
> box won’t get you anywhere, and I don’t believe RHEL4 even used yum, it used
> Redhat Network to get RPMs.  All my new stuff on CentOS5 and 6 has been
> updated.
>
> What I was asking for an opinion on was whether the RPM that Oracle made
> available was likely to work, or to brick the box.  Keep in mind that
> bricking your command shell could be difficult to recover from, especially
> on a headless appliance at a remote site.  I’m guessing that creating
> another user with a different shell like csh or ksh might offer a failsafe.
> I would have to see what other shells are available on the device.
>
> So this is a Tyan kiosk type server with BlueQuartz installed, long ago
> defunct.  Nuonce was maintaining repositories but stopped a long time ago.
>
> Other people are going to face similar situations.  Not every server is
> built from scratch loading the OS and then the applications.  Sometimes you
> use an all-in-one install disk, like CactiEZ or some of the Asterisk/FreePBX
> distributions.  I’m evaluating the PBX appliances from Grandstream, clearly
> they run Asterisk and probably Linux under the hood, but you can’t even get
> to the command line, so any software updates would have to be from the web
> GUI with updates from Grandstream.  So I’m thinking if that’s a problem,
> being totally dependent on the vendor, I guess stuff like routers are the
> same.  But you can’t just go and do a yum update on everything that has
> Linux inside, or recompile the source code with the patch and install it
> yourself, even assuming you feel comfortable doing that.
>
>
> From: Shayne Lebrun via Af
> Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:00 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment
> variablescodeinjection attack
>
>
> Quite honestly, who cares?  There’s zero downside to closing the security
> hole.
>
>
>
> Hopefully you’re closing all your other security holes too, especially for
> things like DNS or NTP that are almost public facing by default.  Why not
> close this one at the same time?
>
>
>
> What happens in six months when you, or somebody, stick another service on
> that machine?
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken
> Hohhof via Af
> Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:38 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables
> codeinjection attack
>
>
>
> Why?
>
>
>
> Take the case of a dedicated server that only does let’s say DHCP or DNS or
> NTP.  It only has one port open to the Internet, and there’s no way to get
> to a bash shell via that port.  How the hell is someone going to pass an
> environment variable to a bash shell on that server?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Shayne Lebrun via Af
>
> Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 8:40 AM
>
> To: af@afmug.com
>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables
> codeinjection attack
>
>
>
> Ø  I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you
> would need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a
> shell, or find a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment
> variable to bash for you.
>
>
>
> Please don’t think like this.
>
>
>
> From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken
> Hohhof via Af
> Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 1:38 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variables code
> injection attack
>
>
>
> So maybe I won’t do that.
>
>
>
> The newer servers where I could just do a yum update have been
> straightforward, as you’d expect.
>
>
>
> I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would
> need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a shell,
> or find a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment variable to
> bash for you.
>
>
>
> From: Jeremy via Af
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection attack

2014-09-29 Thread Timothy D. McNabb via Af
TBH there is one thing I love most about a CentOS distro over Windows. 
IPTables. Windows firewall is pretty lame in comparison, with open ports you 
will “possibly” use. At least IP tables initially comes with a “block all” 
setup and you just go in and poke the tiny holes you need. Obviously a 
security-conscious person is going to shutdown system services you don’t need, 
but for the initial setup IPtables is pretty badass (and far more simple).

@Ken, I am in the same boat as you. We applied updates Thursday and again 
Friday for bash on our CentOS 5/6 boxes. So far so good though, I’ve been 
monitoring the logs of our boxes running httpd and so far nothing out of the 
ordinary has appeared.

-Tim

From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+tim=velociter@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Shayne 
Lebrun via Af
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 4:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection 
attack

Originally, I responded to this:

Ø  “I think the articles have maybe overstated the risk a bit, since you would 
need to either authenticate (at least as a regular user) to get to a shell, or 
find a publicly exposed script that will pass an environment variable to bash 
for you.
And asked you not to think about security in those terms.  Don’t assume you 
understand all the possible attack vectors, don’t assume that because certain 
other things need to happen, you’re invulnerable, etc etc.  When you get right 
down to it, though, UNIX really wants to land you at a shell, and bash is the 
default shell in a lot of places.

You’re certainly listed a whole bunch of issues in the software world at large, 
dedicated applicances, etc etc and I certainly sympathize with a lot of the 
issues you’ve raised.

Of course, the slightly less empathetic sysadmin in me says ‘too bad; you put 
public-facing server on the Internet, you have an obligation, and a 
responsibility to maintain it properly.’  I argue in my head with him A LOT.

Yes, absolutely, you can mitigate the issues you raised in your last email to a 
very reasonable degree with proper firewalling, internal processes, etc etc.  
And it sounds like you’re cognizant of the need to do that, so that’s great too.


From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 9:55 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection 
attack

You are preaching rather than listening.

What if it is an appliance with a distribution that is frozen in time on 
CentOS4 with no updates.  Note that RHEL4 updates are only available via paid 
extended support, and CentOS4 is EOL.  Doing a yum update on a CentOS4 box 
won’t get you anywhere, and I don’t believe RHEL4 even used yum, it used Redhat 
Network to get RPMs.  All my new stuff on CentOS5 and 6 has been updated.

What I was asking for an opinion on was whether the RPM that Oracle made 
available was likely to work, or to brick the box.  Keep in mind that bricking 
your command shell could be difficult to recover from, especially on a headless 
appliance at a remote site.  I’m guessing that creating another user with a 
different shell like csh or ksh might offer a failsafe.  I would have to see 
what other shells are available on the device.

So this is a Tyan kiosk type server with BlueQuartz installed, long ago 
defunct.  Nuonce was maintaining repositories but stopped a long time ago.

Other people are going to face similar situations.  Not every server is built 
from scratch loading the OS and then the applications.  Sometimes you use an 
all-in-one install disk, like CactiEZ or some of the Asterisk/FreePBX 
distributions.  I’m evaluating the PBX appliances from Grandstream, clearly 
they run Asterisk and probably Linux under the hood, but you can’t even get to 
the command line, so any software updates would have to be from the web GUI 
with updates from Grandstream.  So I’m thinking if that’s a problem, being 
totally dependent on the vendor, I guess stuff like routers are the same.  But 
you can’t just go and do a yum update on everything that has Linux inside, or 
recompile the source code with the patch and install it yourself, even assuming 
you feel comfortable doing that.


From: Shayne Lebrun via Af<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bash specially-crafted environment variablescodeinjection 
attack

Quite honestly, who cares?  There’s zero downside to closing the security hole.

Hopefully you’re closing all your other security holes too, especially for 
things like DNS or NTP that are almost public facing by default.  Why not close 
this one at the same time?

What happens in six months when you, or somebody, stick another service on that 
machine?


From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken 
Hohhof via Af
Sent: Sunday, September 28