Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log {Scanned}

2005-02-11 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] uses the CentOS default sendmail config that does not forward mail. --- David Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cat your maillog. Grep out the msg ID. > > cat /var/log/maillog | grep j1A1U7Q1010071 > > > j1A1U7Q1010071 is the [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > j1A1U7mf010088 is email fro

Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log

2005-02-10 Thread Geoff Scott
On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 11:36:36 -0500, Julio Arruda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One good step is to 'test' your public IPs against any mistake/hole like > this. > I've used http://www.ordb.org in the past for this purpose, others for > sure are available. > I would assume is a valuable feedback to

Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log

2005-02-10 Thread Rich Adamson
> >> I'll call bullshit on that. I know for a fact that Debian does NOT > >> allow root logins except from console. Hell Debian isn't allowing > >> root logins > >> from X anymore due to the likely hood for you to try and use root for > >> more than administration. > > > > > > I'm sure that's tr

Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log

2005-02-10 Thread Rich Adamson
> > I'll call bullshit on that. I know for a fact that > > Debian does NOT allow root logins except from > > console. Hell Debian isn't allowing root logins > > from X anymore due to the likely hood for you to > > try and use root for more than administration. > > I'm sure that's true nowadays.

Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log

2005-02-10 Thread Doug Lytle
Noah Miller wrote: I'll call bullshit on that. I know for a fact that Debian does NOT allow root logins except from console. Hell Debian isn't allowing root logins from X anymore due to the likely hood for you to try and use root for more than administration. I'm sure that's true nowadays. I h

Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log {Scanned}

2005-02-10 Thread David Shaw
Cat your maillog. Grep out the msg ID. cat /var/log/maillog | grep j1A1U7Q1010071 j1A1U7Q1010071 is the [EMAIL PROTECTED] j1A1U7mf010088 is email from root to??? Have you checked root's email?? Your might want to edit /etc/aliases and forward root: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Also check sendmail deam

[Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log

2005-02-10 Thread Noah Miller
I'll call bullshit on that. I know for a fact that Debian does NOT allow root logins except from console. Hell Debian isn't allowing root logins from X anymore due to the likely hood for you to try and use root for more than administration. I'm sure that's true nowadays. I haven't played with

Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log

2005-02-10 Thread Bruno Hertz
On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 11:09 -0500, Jason Stewart wrote: > There's a chance that you may have been hacked, but the logs you post > look more like your mailserver is an open relay. You sure? I run postfix myself and am not proficient in analyzing sendmail logs, but looking at those lines Feb 9 20

Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log

2005-02-10 Thread Julio Arruda
One good step is to 'test' your public IPs against any mistake/hole like this. I've used http://www.ordb.org in the past for this purpose, others for sure are available. I would assume is a valuable feedback to provide to the folks from [EMAIL PROTECTED], to have a more "conservative" configurat

[Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log

2005-02-10 Thread Jean-Louis curty
hummm if that's the case I might not be the only one! I only installed the [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso (based on centos distro )and did not change a little comma of the configuration of sendmail, MTA is configured by default already by [EMAIL PROTECTED] jl On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 11:09:29 -0500, Jason St

[Asterisk-Users] Re: asterisk@home scary log

2005-02-10 Thread Jason Stewart
On 10/02/05 15:10 +0100, Jean-Louis curty wrote: > so I stopped asterisk, type mail and got a strange mail saying that > user [EMAIL PROTECTED] could not be reached and body was like if it was > the result of commands ifconfig etc > > unfortunally I don't have the message anymore but I went to the