Re: More hacked servers?

2003-11-28 Thread Eric LeBlanc




On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Marcel Hicking wrote:

 I'd definitely prefer to have them working on getting things
 up and running again and do the forensics. They should waste a
 minute too much on reports that might proove wrong finally anyway.

Minute? Every minute is cucial... So hmm.. They dont eat, talking with
their family, cleaning, sleeping, etc since 21 November? :-)

 This would confuse everyone more than it would help.
 And, honestly, doesn't your experience show that wild guesses
 about how long complex things might take nearly alway provve
 wrong?

Confuse? Come on... we are more intelligent than that.  A lest, their
servers have compromised, and it's a concern of all of us, becase we use
THEIR packages.  I WANT to known what they do actually, and maybe not you,
but I'm sure the majority in this ML want to know...

Let me clear: I don't want details about observations, but WHAT they do
actually.

Same as in company, the manager want to know sometimes what you do in a
critical situation.  I dont want a report with 100 pages, but 2-3 lines is
sufficient. Theses servers have compromised since ~20 November, and we
don't have a word about this, not one.


 Why would I want to know who's typing what right now? I'd be
 interested in a all-in-one final report, that's for sure, but
 I'll be happy with this. And in case any urgent security problem
 pops up during investigation I'm pretty sure we'll be
 informed right away. The secteam has done an amazing job in the
 past and I trust them to continue as responsible as before.

I agree with you.



 Cheers, Marcel


E.
--
Eric LeBlanc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
UNIX is user friendly.
It's just selective about who its friends are.
==



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: More hacked servers?

2003-11-28 Thread Eric LeBlanc




On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Marcel Hicking wrote:

 I'd definitely prefer to have them working on getting things
 up and running again and do the forensics. They should waste a
 minute too much on reports that might proove wrong finally anyway.

Minute? Every minute is cucial... So hmm.. They dont eat, talking with
their family, cleaning, sleeping, etc since 21 November? :-)

 This would confuse everyone more than it would help.
 And, honestly, doesn't your experience show that wild guesses
 about how long complex things might take nearly alway provve
 wrong?

Confuse? Come on... we are more intelligent than that.  A lest, their
servers have compromised, and it's a concern of all of us, becase we use
THEIR packages.  I WANT to known what they do actually, and maybe not you,
but I'm sure the majority in this ML want to know...

Let me clear: I don't want details about observations, but WHAT they do
actually.

Same as in company, the manager want to know sometimes what you do in a
critical situation.  I dont want a report with 100 pages, but 2-3 lines is
sufficient. Theses servers have compromised since ~20 November, and we
don't have a word about this, not one.


 Why would I want to know who's typing what right now? I'd be
 interested in a all-in-one final report, that's for sure, but
 I'll be happy with this. And in case any urgent security problem
 pops up during investigation I'm pretty sure we'll be
 informed right away. The secteam has done an amazing job in the
 past and I trust them to continue as responsible as before.

I agree with you.



 Cheers, Marcel


E.
--
Eric LeBlanc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
UNIX is user friendly.
It's just selective about who its friends are.
==




Re: More hacked servers?

2003-11-27 Thread Eric LeBlanc




On Thu, 27 Nov 2003, Dan Jacobson wrote:

  So, give the people some time and after the details are disclosed -
  learn from their experience and use it in your work.

 Let's examine natural disasters, e.g. a typhoon.  The pros agree that
 the public must be able to get to timely reports issued from the
 disaster control center, via e.g. local radio stations.

 Here in the debian world, there was one announcement posted on the
 21st, then blackness.  One assumes those in charge have been replaced
 by zombies and the typhoon is headed our way.


I agree.

A least, they can stay us informed about their actions... for example:

21 sep: hacked, we moved all domain to blah, bluh, blih.
22 sep: investiguation started, by X, X.  We think it will take X
hours/day/month/years
24 sep: We still investiguate, please be patient, we think we will
terminate that in two hour/day/month/years.
...

and so on, it's not so hard, and it's take 2 minutes or less.

E.
--
Eric LeBlanc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
UNIX is user friendly.
It's just selective about who its friends are.
==




Re: Debian Stable server hacked

2003-08-14 Thread Eric LeBlanc

On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Thijs Welman wrote:


 Thanks. I forgot to mantion that i am subscribed to
 debian-security-announce as well (ofcourse ;)). As far as the kernel
 updates are concerned: i use my own kernel. At this moment that's 2.4.21
 with Alan Cox' patches (ac4). Could be there's an exploit in that
 kernelversion. Maybe i should consider to go back to a
 debian-packagekernel...

 Anyone any comment on or experience with debian vs custom kernels?

 -- Thijs


Since 7 years, I always use custom kernels, and I never had problems (bugs
nor exploits).

It's run very well and smoothly :)

E.
--
Eric LeBlanc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
UNIX is user friendly.
It's just selective about who its friends are.
==



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Debian Stable server hacked

2003-08-07 Thread Eric LeBlanc

On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Thijs Welman wrote:


 Thanks. I forgot to mantion that i am subscribed to
 debian-security-announce as well (ofcourse ;)). As far as the kernel
 updates are concerned: i use my own kernel. At this moment that's 2.4.21
 with Alan Cox' patches (ac4). Could be there's an exploit in that
 kernelversion. Maybe i should consider to go back to a
 debian-packagekernel...

 Anyone any comment on or experience with debian vs custom kernels?

 -- Thijs


Since 7 years, I always use custom kernels, and I never had problems (bugs
nor exploits).

It's run very well and smoothly :)

E.
--
Eric LeBlanc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
UNIX is user friendly.
It's just selective about who its friends are.
==




Re: chkrootkit and LKM

2003-05-26 Thread Eric LeBlanc


the prog compare the proc list in /proc and the output of command 'ps'.
So, when the chkrootkit will list in /proc, and then get an output from ps,
the time between two operation is larger enough to create others process
(or die/kill)...

that's why this check is not VERY reliable.


E.
--
Eric LeBlanc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
UNIX is user friendly.
It's just selective about who its friends are.
==

On Mon, 26 May 2003, IC0N wrote:

 Bonjour

 as Jacques Lavignotte [EMAIL PROTECTED] and Jens Schuessler
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted in their mails at 7th of March 2003 i have
 exactly the same alert message using chkrootkit:

 Checking `lkm'... You have 1 process hidden for readdir command
 You have 1 process hidden for ps command
 Warning: Possible LKM Trojan installed

 Sometimes I get 2 or 3 processes, sometimes NONE

 is there a plausible reason why there could be a hidden prozess?
 hidden even for root? even if LKM is not installed? i did not find
 any possible reason. i only know that i can also reproduce the
 alert by installing debian on a brand new harddisk. i used debian
 woody 3.0 with kernel 2.2 CD Image of 11th of december 2002.

 greetings icon


 --
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: Have I been hacked?

2003-05-07 Thread Eric LeBlanc

Check if your program have rotated the logs...

cd /var/log

ls -l wtmp*

and, check in /etc/cron* or do a crontab -l (in user root)


E.
--
Eric LeBlanc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
UNIX is user friendly.
It's just selective about who its friends are.
==

On Wed, 7 May 2003, Ian Goodall wrote:

 I am running a debian woody server and when I checked the last users
 yesterday I a large number of logins in the list. On running the command
 today I get the following:

 dev1:/home/ian# last
 ian  pts/0172.16.3.195 Wed May  7 14:49   still logged in
 team1pts/0blue99.ex.ac.uk  Wed May  7 13:21 - 13:57  (00:35)

 I have run chkrootkit but nothing was found.

 I have never had this before. Am I being paranoid or is someone trying to
 cover up their tracks?

 Thanks

 ijg0



 --
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: syn flood attacked?

2002-05-17 Thread Eric LeBlanc



On Fri, 17 May 2002, Michal Melewski wrote:

  May 17 23:03:11 ms2 kernel: possible SYN flooding on port 25. Sending cookies.

  Am I being syn flood attacked? How can I get rid of this?
 Hello
 In this case you are probably a target of a SYN Flood atack.
 What you have to do is to compile your kernel with option with
 protect_against_synflood (or something like this, but for sure in network
 submenu). Make sure to read the help for this option because compiling it into
 kernel isn't enough... (you have to issue a command 
 echo 1  /don't/remember/where ;) )

It is activated... it's called cookies, as show above.  For more
informations, read this documentation:

http://cr.yp.to/syncookies.html

Eric


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: syn flood attacked?

2002-05-17 Thread Eric LeBlanc


On Fri, 17 May 2002, Michal Melewski wrote:

  May 17 23:03:11 ms2 kernel: possible SYN flooding on port 25. Sending 
  cookies.

  Am I being syn flood attacked? How can I get rid of this?
 Hello
 In this case you are probably a target of a SYN Flood atack.
 What you have to do is to compile your kernel with option with
 protect_against_synflood (or something like this, but for sure in network
 submenu). Make sure to read the help for this option because compiling it into
 kernel isn't enough... (you have to issue a command 
 echo 1  /don't/remember/where ;) )

It is activated... it's called cookies, as show above.  For more
informations, read this documentation:

http://cr.yp.to/syncookies.html

Eric


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: what is means ? + rootkits..

2002-04-22 Thread Eric LeBlanc



On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Jan Johansson wrote:

 
 Then they dont know what they are saying, i would say that Tripwire / AIDE / such 
will be 100% efficient in detecting kits _PROVIDING_ that your database is current, 
and is stored in a tamper-proof location... and ofcource you actually use and update 
teh IDS database.
 


In security, never said 100%, never. Nothing are good to fully trust.  All
are good to be a paranoid, as told by AIDE.

And read the paper (do a search a relevant The future is here):

http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/misc/faqs/rootkits.faq



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]




RE: what is means ? + rootkits..

2002-04-22 Thread Eric LeBlanc


On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Jan Johansson wrote:

 
 Then they dont know what they are saying, i would say that Tripwire / AIDE / 
 such will be 100% efficient in detecting kits _PROVIDING_ that your database 
 is current, and is stored in a tamper-proof location... and ofcource you 
 actually use and update teh IDS database.
 


In security, never said 100%, never. Nothing are good to fully trust.  All
are good to be a paranoid, as told by AIDE.

And read the paper (do a search a relevant The future is here):

http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/misc/faqs/rootkits.faq



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: A question about some network services

2002-04-02 Thread Eric LeBlanc


On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Anne Carasik wrote:

 On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 07:45:21PM +0200, eim wrote:
  A question about some network services
  ==
  
  Hallo Debian folks,
  
  By default, on my debian boxes, I disable this network
  services which are enabled automaticly during a fresh
  Debian stable aka potato installtion:
  
  * daytime
  * time
  * discard
  


Very simple.. play with telnet :-)

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ telnet 0 daytime
Trying 0.0.0.0...
Connected to 0.0.0.0.
Escape character is '^]'.
Tue Apr  2 13:24:03 2002
Connection closed by foreign host.

---
Conclusion: daytime is used to see the time in a remote machine.



[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ telnet 0 discard
Trying 0.0.0.0...
Connected to 0.0.0.0.
Escape character is '^]'.
test
hello
blah
^]
telnet quit

---
Conclusion: As the name said, it's used for a test I think... He simply
ignore all your words.


[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ telnet 0  time
Trying 0.0.0.0...
Connected to 0.0.0.0.
Escape character is '^]'.
ÀTvNConnection closed by foreign host.

---
Conclusion: It's used by a program... such as NTP, because the output is
not comprehensive for us.

Eric


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: log analyze applications

2002-02-27 Thread Eric LeBlanc



On 27 Feb 2002, eim wrote:

   * logcheck  (System Log Analyzer)

[SNIP]
 network activity and so on... everything works quite well, the
 only problem is: they generate *REALLY* much mail traffic with
 lots of output which I can't read all.
 
 So my question is, has anyone a good solution for checking
 syslogs, netlogs, etc. in order to have a simple and strict
 overview of system activities ?
 
 Are there any tools which are smarter, faster and cleaner
 as my combination of log analyze apps. ?
 

The most smarter you can find is you brain.  Logcheck is very useful and
does not send many e-mails if you know how to configure correctly.  

In other words, if you don't want to see some messages, so add theses
messages in appropriate ignore file...

Here, each week, in one log file, I have approxymately 800 000 lines, and
I use logchecker to search some words (and discard other words) to put in
report and e-mail it to me, and (it's luck or it's a good configuration?)
each e-mail which I had recieved are useful for me.

Eric


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: log analyze applications

2002-02-27 Thread Eric LeBlanc


On 27 Feb 2002, eim wrote:

   * logcheck  (System Log Analyzer)

[SNIP]
 network activity and so on... everything works quite well, the
 only problem is: they generate *REALLY* much mail traffic with
 lots of output which I can't read all.
 
 So my question is, has anyone a good solution for checking
 syslogs, netlogs, etc. in order to have a simple and strict
 overview of system activities ?
 
 Are there any tools which are smarter, faster and cleaner
 as my combination of log analyze apps. ?
 

The most smarter you can find is you brain.  Logcheck is very useful and
does not send many e-mails if you know how to configure correctly.  

In other words, if you don't want to see some messages, so add theses
messages in appropriate ignore file...

Here, each week, in one log file, I have approxymately 800 000 lines, and
I use logchecker to search some words (and discard other words) to put in
report and e-mail it to me, and (it's luck or it's a good configuration?)
each e-mail which I had recieved are useful for me.

Eric



Re: Running root commands by http

2001-08-23 Thread Eric LeBlanc

Do u know webmin?

http://webadmin.sourceforge.net/webmin/

Eric

On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Jean Baptiste Lallement wrote:

 Hi, 
 
 U could use sudo ?
 
 Excerpt from http://www.courtesan.com/sudo/
 ---
 Sudo (superuser do) allows a system administrator to give certain
 users (or groups of users) the ability to run some (or all) commands
 as root or another user while logging the commands and arguments.
 ---
 
 and run it with a cgi or php or whatever.
 
 Hth
 
 On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 02:58:23PM +0200, Emmanuel Lacour wrote:
  
  Hi,
  
  
  I wan't to get some opinions on doing this:
  
  Making someone to be able to create unix users by an http method (from an http 
browser).
  Making someone to be able to restart a daemon under the identity of root from http.
  
  
  I think about some methods:
  
  Running a cgi or system() under php
  +
  -use super to run the program
  -making the programs needed setuid root (bhh)
  -Sending a mail to the root containing specials header. A cron will inspect the 
root mailbox and execute commands as root, or a procmailrc?
  -Another idea more secure??
  
  
  Thanks.
  
  
  Manu. 
  
  
  
  -- 
  Easter-eggsSpécialiste GNU/Linux
  44-46 rue de l'Ouest  -  75014 Paris   -   France -  Métro Gaité
  Phone: +33 (0) 1 43 35 00 37- Fax: +33 (0) 1 41 35 00 76
  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   -http://www.easter-eggs.com
 
 
 
 -- 
   
  |_  | Jean Baptiste Lallement
   / /  ZENI Corporationhttp://zeni.fr
  |___| Tel: 0 803 003 111
 
 
 
 -- 
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: Running root commands by http

2001-08-23 Thread Eric LeBlanc
Do u know webmin?

http://webadmin.sourceforge.net/webmin/

Eric

On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Jean Baptiste Lallement wrote:

 Hi, 
 
 U could use sudo ?
 
 Excerpt from http://www.courtesan.com/sudo/
 ---
 Sudo (superuser do) allows a system administrator to give certain
 users (or groups of users) the ability to run some (or all) commands
 as root or another user while logging the commands and arguments.
 ---
 
 and run it with a cgi or php or whatever.
 
 Hth
 
 On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 02:58:23PM +0200, Emmanuel Lacour wrote:
  
  Hi,
  
  
  I wan't to get some opinions on doing this:
  
  Making someone to be able to create unix users by an http method (from an 
  http browser).
  Making someone to be able to restart a daemon under the identity of root 
  from http.
  
  
  I think about some methods:
  
  Running a cgi or system() under php
  +
  -use super to run the program
  -making the programs needed setuid root (bhh)
  -Sending a mail to the root containing specials header. A cron will inspect 
  the root mailbox and execute commands as root, or a procmailrc?
  -Another idea more secure??
  
  
  Thanks.
  
  
  Manu. 
  
  
  
  -- 
  Easter-eggsSpécialiste GNU/Linux
  44-46 rue de l'Ouest  -  75014 Paris   -   France -  Métro Gaité
  Phone: +33 (0) 1 43 35 00 37- Fax: +33 (0) 1 41 35 00 76
  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   -http://www.easter-eggs.com
 
 
 
 -- 
   
  |_  | Jean Baptiste Lallement
   / /  ZENI Corporationhttp://zeni.fr
  |___| Tel: 0 803 003 111
 
 
 
 -- 
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 



Re: libwrap.h

2001-02-14 Thread Eric LeBlanc
I don't understand... I try to help it and I am made insult?

Well if I insulted you, I present my major excuses to you, 
M'sieur...


Eric LeBlanc
E-Mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ 50571872
   
  Well, let's just say, 'if your VCR is still blinking 12:00, you don't
   want Linux'.
--- Bruce Perens, Debian's Fearless Leader