March 2001 - openSUSE Security - openSUSE Mailing Lists

SSH Authentication
by Joao Reis 18 Nov '02

18 Nov '02

Hi! I implemented a ssh conection from the outside to my intranet. This ssh requires a username and a password. In terms of security what is more secure: require authentication (username and password) or having the public key of each user that connects to our intranet in the authorized public key lists (in this case there is no need for username and password)? In the second case there is no need of authentication and only the users wich have the public keys in the list are allowed to enter in my intranet. This second solution is a good solution or that brings other security problems ? Thanks. -- Farewell. "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer." "Do or do not. There is no try" - Yoda João Reis -------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Sendmail SMTP AUTH / SSL
by Raffy 02 Apr '01

02 Apr '01

Hey list, On my box I have sendmail running. In order to use SMTP over SSL I run it with stunnel in inetd: smpts stream tcp nowait root /usr/local/sbin/stunnel stunnel -D 3 -p /usr/local/ssl/certs/stunnel.pem -r smtp Further I configured sendmail to use SMTP AUTH. Everything works perfect. But: smpts is on port 465. I configured my clients such that they use that port. So far so good. But now port 25 can still be used to send email. I could block it at the firewall but then I am not able to receive email any more, because other mailservers are talking with me on that port. (right?) Is there a solution that I can use SMTP over SSL and SMTP AUTH? Clients should not be able to connect without SSL or SMPT AUTH! Thanks Raffy

19 31

Bind
by Hipolito A. Gonzalez M. 02 Apr '01

02 Apr '01

I upgrade to the new 8-8.2.3 bind version, but, every morning the daemon "named" is stop. Is any trying to hack me? I have and real ip and I'm making hosting. Thank you. In log nothing appear. -- www.geekcode.com -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/cc/e/it d++ s+:+ a-- C++$ UL+++$ E++ W+++$ w--- O---- M V- PS PE+++ Y+ PGP- t+ 5 X++ R tv+ b++ DI-- D+ G e++$ h! r++ y++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ - A veces creo que hay vida en otros planetas, y a veces creo que no. En cualquiera de los dos casos, la conclusión es asombrosa (Carl Sagan) -----------------------------------------------------------------

3 3

iptables
by office＠tride.net 02 Apr '01

02 Apr '01

Hello list, does the SuSEfirewall-script support iptables? cu

3 2

bind-update-attempt
by Daniel Quappe 31 Mar '01

31 Mar '01

hi list, in the last weeks i often got the syslog-message that somebody wanted to update my bind-server for somedomain which was of course denied by my bind-system by default. but: are there any problems in the software i have to think about with regard to a worst case scenario...;-) many thanks in advance, bye daniel

3 3

suse enterprise server
by bacano 30 Mar '01

30 Mar '01

hi2all, Regarding the security applications and features included in suse enterprise edition, what it has more than the professional version? Will be available any upgrade from professional to enterprise edition? [ ]'s bacano

1 0

lockdsvc : invalid argument. when loading nfsserver in 2.4.2
by Avi Schwartz 30 Mar '01

30 Mar '01

When starting up the nfsserver under Kernel 2.4.2 I get the error message lockdsvc : invalid argument. Searching the Internet (thanks Google!), I found some messages in the linux-kernel mailing list that there is no need to start rpc.lockd from the init scripts any more when using rhe 2.4.X kernels as it is loaded automatically on mount. I commented out these line from /etc/rc.d/nfsserver: checkproc -n lockd || \ /usr/sbin/rpc.lockd and restarted the NFS server. The error is gone and so far everything seems to work. Two questions: 1) Am I inviting problems by commenting out these lines? Is there a security issue? 2) If they are no longer needed, could SuSE please fix the scripts. Thanks, Avi -- Avi Schwartz Get a Life, avi(a)CFFtechnologies.com Get Linux!

1 0

many nic's
by office 30 Mar '01

30 Mar '01

Hello, how many network cards can i put into my linux box for firewalling? cu

3 2

Re: [suse-security] Ports
by NightWatcher 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, you wrote: > I am administering a system that needs access to certain ports, but I do > not want to restrict access to these ports for these programs. The ports > are 5555 and 7000. How do I do this do that it is still secure and won't > create any security holes. > > > thank you, > michael > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: suse-security-unsubscribe(a)suse.com > For additional commands, e-mail: suse-security-help(a)suse.com well who do u want to have access to the host (all? or single ips?) when it are single ips u can use the ipchains -I input -p tcp-s thefromip -d yourinternetip portnumber -j ACCEPT and after that ipchains -A input -p -s 0/0 -d urip port -j REJECT.. then only the accepted ips can enter.. otherwise make sure u cant login to that port using telnet etc (like an ftp server wich u can access with telnet and then turn it off( www.dutchriot.com)) hope that u have something about it greetz remko (NightWatcher IRCop(a)irc.quicknet.nl) Security Admin / advisor -------------------------------------------------------

1 0

DNS and Firewall (again) !
by Diogo Bacelar Quintela 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

Hello List I have a small network base on private ips and have one masquerading server. I want to specify in TCP options on the other machines the gate way machine as a dns server also.. Some abstraction.. I used to have named doing name caching for that. However now I am trying to use SuSEFirewall (or even by hand) to do that work. I mean.. All trafic from internal machines to firewall 's dns port (53) be automatically redirected (and masqueraded) to one dns server of the ISP (or both of those..) I have a cable connection and a SuSE 7.1 FTP clean installation. I believe it is SuSEfirewall 4.3 and kernel 2.4.2.. Is it possible ? I've looked and firewall's config and there are two non matching option's : port redirection (No private ips) and local port redirection (doesn't work!) TIA Diogo Quintela /------------------------------------------------------------------ || Diogo Bacelar Quintela ||----------------------------------------------------------------- || diogo.quintela(a)netcabo.pt // dbq(a)rnl.ist.utl.pt ||----------------------------------------------------------------- || PGP Public Key || http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x2099755D \------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

RE: [suse-security] AW: Squid on Firewall?
by Reckhard, Tobias 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

> AFAIK you should NEVER use a > proxy etc. on any firewall due to the buffer- > overflow-problem. sorry... > Huh? Get real, man, with that attitude you shouldn't connect anything to an untrusted network, as any application could be susceptible to buffer overflows. And check out the literature on firewalls whenever you have a bit of spare time, I recommend the 2nd edition of 'Building Internet Firewalls' by Chapman, Cooper and Zwicky. Most, if not all, of the firewall people prefer application layer gateways, aka application proxies, over packet filters when constructing firewalls. And I'd much rather have only one application, the proxy, to watch for a compromise than the entire number of client applications.. Cheers, Tobias

5 5

Kernel Backdoor (April Fool's joke)
by Roman Drahtmueller 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To those involved in Linux security: The latest release of "Linux-Magazin", a monthly German magazine that focuses on Linux, contains an article by Mirko Dölle about security problems in the Linux kernel. In particular, the article argues that IP packets could be forwarded to the address 208.47.125.33 (there is a PTR record at gary7.nsa.gov, which has an A record back to the same address). Many German Linux users have been calling SuSE support to learn details on how to deal with this problem, not willing to believe that the article is an April Fool's joke on security. None of the claims are correct, which makes a kernel update unnecessary for this particular problem. Now, as inclined readers of security mailing lists may have noticed, there are indeed security problems in the Linux kernel. These problems are no backdoors of any kind, and they are not related to the article mentioned above. In addition, the known kernel security issues are not remotely exploitable, which means that local shell access is needed to take advantage of the weaknesses. The weaknesses allow for a local attacker to gain superuser access to the system. SuSE will provide update packages for the supported distributions 6.3, 6.4, 7.0 and 7.1 shortly that eliminate the known problems. The SuSE kernels are standard kernels, equipped with a set of patches that introduce drivers and many other enhancements to the standard Linux kernel. The update packages are currently being tested and will be available and announced as soon as possible. As an information for those who compile and install their own kernels: The freshly released Linux kernel version 2.2.19 fixes the known issues in the kernel. It should run smoothly on all 6.x SuSE Linux distributions, but please note that 2.2.19 requires update packages for the lvm and/or the raidtools (formerly mdutils) package if lvm (logical volume manager) or the software raid facility of the Linux kernel are used. The lvm package is available for download from our ftp server ftp.suse.com, the raidtools package will follow soon. Regards, Roman Drahtmüller, SuSE Security -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBOsM8uney5gA9JdPZAQGnRggAkh+oXciCyj07rUgi0YJ4DEQVYopJRZQw oYFcktCTC/CYXE42ZEkChlMO9UA2Op6kiFyqDnaIKo12C1555CxAJgjszQfAjPCe 1b2kxLNtY0GvibkFHjgJ5BLeh7rM3d7bMoA14HKSNXcHDQIuJEUD0Hh0ENe4fNng qfZNHsd2EIdkjN3ncuQGjqPvy5N+se145OrEUGsOFY5Xb1KajxJhd8SlJ8+VkjTA 5tRi4NvLUZqdk1eKPvcKSkIuuv/rmSSOBEASUr/dEmy4Z8guVNW3qP6jk4HtPjYp 23yTkhZDHaYpCC7S/gMoU3pSrre0nh51W6yQx1oBOqaWZJtLSUJ+2A== =RpeD -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Lion worm with SuSEfirewall blocked?
by Marko Kaening 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

Hi, at http://www.sans.org/y2k/lion_protection.htm one can read how to prevent Lion attack using ipchains. Is this already included in the SuSEfirewall 4.4? Regards, Marko -- O _ O 0 0 ------------------m-\o/-m------------------------------------------ Dr. Marko K"aning Tel/Fax: +49-3834 554 442 / -3834 554 301 INP Greifswald email : kaening(a)inp-greifswald.de

2 1

Security updates and You
by Togan Muftuoglu 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

Hi, I might be wrong in jumping in making an assumption yet when I clicked the location mentioned in the message with the subject [suse-security] Lion worm with SuSEfirewall blocked? I out of curiosity cliked the link to the suse update site mentioned where I have been informed regarding teh apache update with security fix note. 1) Has there been a security announcement for that which I accidently did not noticed. If there was none the package is dated 21 st March meaning a week over so there is something missing. Or alternativle apache 1.3.17 is not vulnarable. 2) patches directory does not have anything regarding apache so if you do an update with YOU you will not get it. I though YOU was for security fixes Sorry if there had been an announcement an I have missed it -- Togan Muftuoglu

1 0

security checking daemons
by Morsal Roudbay 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

I have installed several security checking deamons that come with SuSE 7.0. Daily, weekly and monthly reports are all sent to root... Is it possible to somewhere change this setting so it's sent to an email account of mine? Thanks in advance.

3 2

RE: [suse-security] AW: Squid on Firewall?
by Reckhard, Tobias 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

> > However, of course you'll have programs running on the packet filter > > as well. First, there's the kernel. Then you've probably got syslogd > > and crond running. > > A DHCP client is more likely. I would not have crond, the only thing ... [large snip] Yeah, whatever. Those are good ideas, Mike, but my point was *that* he'll have software running on a packet filter, not *what* software that is exactly. That's an entirely different and rather large can of beans.. Cheers, Tobias

1 0

Re: [suse-security] dns zone x-fers on tcp 53
by Markus Gaugusch 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

> What is the reason for installing pri dns server in a self owned DMZ and sec > dns server at the isp? Convenience - you can manipulate the zones easier. > If the firewall ist not stateful this enables inet users to do dns > probes on tcp 53 and other worse things. why? you can block tcp port 53 for everyone except the ip of the secondary NS. bye Markus -- _____________________________ /"\ Markus Gaugusch ICQ 11374583 \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign markus(a)gaugusch.dhs.org X Against HTML Mail / \

2 1

do these log entries document attacks?
by Christian Gorski 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

hallo friends of linux does anybody know what i´ve got here, where X.X.X.1 is the box which logs these messages? 1) Mar 27 19:46:38 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 212.94.211.160:4586 X.X.X.1:27374 L=48 S=0x00 I=59472 F=0x4000 T=111 SYN (#42) Mar 27 19:46:38 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 212.94.211.160:4590 X.X.X.255:27374 L=48 S=0x00 I=60496 F=0x4000 T=111 SYN (#42) Mar 27 19:46:38 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 212.94.211.160:4590 X.X.X.255:27374 L=48 S=0x00 I=337 F=0x4000 T=111 SYN (#42) Mar 27 19:46:39 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 212.94.211.160:4590 X.X.X.255:27374 L=48 S=0x00 I=3921 F=0x4000 T=111 SYN (#42) Mar 27 19:46:39 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 212.94.211.160:4590 X.X.X.255:27374 L=48 S=0x00 I=6993 F=0x4000 T=111 SYN (#42) Mar 27 19:46:41 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 212.94.211.160:4586 X.X.X.1:27374 L=48 S=0x00 I=18257 F=0x4000 T=111 SYN (#42) 2) Mar 27 20:26:44 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=17 212.93.208.240:28432 X.X.X.1:28431 L=29 S=0x00 I=44573 F=0x0000 T=119 (#42) Mar 27 20:26:44 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=17 212.93.208.240:28432 X.X.X.255:28431 L=29 S=0x00 I=45597 F=0x0000 T=119 (#42) 3) Mar 27 21:38:29 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 207.194.143.211:1002 X.X.X.1:111 L=60 S=0x00 I=38602 F=0x4000 T=49 SYN (#42) Mar 27 21:38:29 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 207.194.143.211:1006 X.X.X.255:111 L=60 S=0x00 I=38606 F=0x4000 T=49 SYN (#42) 4) Mar 28 02:17:11 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 207.18.60.53:2712 X.X.X.1:53 L=60 S=0x00 I=34799 F=0x4000 T=46 SYN (#42) Mar 28 02:17:11 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 207.18.60.53:2716 X.X.X.255:53 L=60 S=0x00 I=34843 F=0x4000 T=46 SYN (#42) Mar 28 02:17:17 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 207.18.60.53:2712 X.X.X.1:53 L=60 S=0x00 I=36023 F=0x4000 T=46 SYN (#42) 5) Mar 28 08:36:18 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=17 210.104.121.253:55675 X.X.X.1:137 L=78 S=0x00 I=61465 F=0x0000 T=105 (#42) Mar 28 08:36:20 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=17 210.104.121.253:55675 X.X.X.1:137 L=78 S=0x00 I=61721 F=0x0000 T=105 (#42) Mar 28 08:36:21 linux kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=17 210.104.121.253:55675 X.X.X.1:137 L=78 S=0x00 I=61977 F=0x0000 T=105 (#42) tia cg

4 4

dns zone x-fers on tcp 53
by Philipp Snizek 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Dear list users, What is the reason for installing pri dns server in a self owned DMZ and sec dns server at the isp? If the firewall ist not stateful this enables inet users to do dns probes on tcp 53 and other worse things. Thank you all for a quick answer, Philipp

2 1

RE: [suse-security] AW: Squid on Firewall?
by Reckhard, Tobias 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Re Daniel. > yes, your are right! getting compromised by a > client applications isn't good indeed...;-) > It sure ain't. :-) > but that wasn't my hint about this topic. > my idea is to separate your system into two > ones: > first you have a hardened firewall-system without > any programm running on it. > second there is a proxy-server behind the wall with > "your" application proxies. > So you mean a pure packet filter when you say 'hardened firewall-system'? I call that a packet filter. :-) Yes, it generally makes sense to have a packet filter as the point of entry to your network. However, there are a couple of possible architectures. Quoting from the book I named: 1. Single-box architectures: screening router, dual-homed host. 2. Screened host architectures 3. Screened subnet architectures 4. Architectures with multiple screened subnets: split-screened subnet, independent screened subnet 5. Variations on firewall architectures If what you're proposing is a packet filter up front and a proxy in the internal network, then you have a screened host architecture. A screened subnet architecture, in which the screened subnet is referred to as a DMZ, is more common in the corporate world. Most Linux home users use a single box, either as a screening router (if they only use ipchains) or, if they're running (some) proxies on the box, as something you could term a hybrid between a screening router and a dual-homed host, or a collapsed DMZ. The latter is the setup described by the initiator of this thread. It is stupid, yes, not to perform packet filtering on a proxy that is part of a firewall system, if you can. However, of course you'll have programs running on the packet filter as well. First, there's the kernel. Then you've probably got syslogd and crond running. Unless you're performing administration from the console only, you'll probably have sshd running. Cheers, Tobias

2 1

SuSE Security Announcement: joe (SuSE-SA:2001:09)
by Thomas Biege 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ______________________________________________________________________________ SuSE Security Announcement Package: joe Announcement-ID: SuSE-SA:2001:09 Date: Tuesday, March 27th, 2001 17.03 MEST Affected SuSE versions: 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 7.0, 7.1 Vulnerability Type: local privilege escalation Severity (1-10): 3 SuSE default package: yes Other affected systems: all system using joe Content of this advisory: 1) security vulnerability resolved: joe problem description, discussion, solution and upgrade information 2) pending vulnerabilities, solutions, workarounds 3) standard appendix (further information) ______________________________________________________________________________ 1) problem description, brief discussion, solution, upgrade information A bug in joe(1), a userfriendly text editor, was found by Christer Öberg of Wkit Security AB a few weeks ago. After starting joe(1) it tries to open its configuration file joerc in the current directory, the users home directory and some other locations. joe(1) doesn't check the ownership of joerc when trying the current directory. An attacker could place a malicious joerc file in a public writeable directory, like /tmp, to execute commands with the privilege of any user (including root), which runs joe while being in this directory. Download the update package from locations desribed below and install the package with the command `rpm -Uhv file.rpm'. The md5sum for each file is in the line below. You can verify the integrity of the rpm files using the command `rpm --checksig --nogpg file.rpm', independently from the md5 signatures below. i386 Intel Platform: SuSE-7.1 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.1/ap1/joe-2.8-300.i386.rpm 3140f1eb79eb246ad98f7687de517371 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.1/zq1/joe-2.8-300.src.rpm 0c04bb25b8ae452f1fcdfe11af32e1b6 SuSE-7.0 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.0/ap1/joe-2.8-304.i386.rpm 2a406de36322fc7bc28aaeca0bbdf54d source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.0/zq1/joe-2.8-304.src.rpm 2aac0d130597d580d96c75d59397958c SuSE-6.4 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.4/ap1/joe-2.8-303.i386.rpm 348a5e4a981f76943c77431606e5c3b2 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.4/zq1/joe-2.8-303.src.rpm 9f938aa365460257baf56f5f92f565ee SuSE-6.3 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.3/ap1/joe-2.8-302.i386.rpm 236ec54a0251859e1c2c1fc4018b5dae source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.3/zq1/joe-2.8-302.src.rpm 49b638dd238cacc8e99048ee5a8024ea SuSE-6.2 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.2/ap1/joe-2.8-302.i386.rpm 094577b41a2ad5baa0d16f4d53378d0e source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.2/zq1/joe-2.8-302.src.rpm 78333a2bac40b08db1e54ccaf1380caf SuSE-6.1 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.1/ap1/joe-2.8-305.i386.rpm 72fbb78af21f3878f1ae8b8bc87c96f4 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.1/zq1/joe-2.8-305.src.rpm b4fbe27a24bf66d60db45da3c3d13020 Sparc Platform: SuSE-7.1 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.1/ap1/joe-2.8-290.sparc.rpm eeb78e413ee0b48d39ccdab29228ae80 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.1/zq1/joe-2.8-290.src.rpm f29199161ffd38f3f26c82b5d21ba89b SuSE-7.0 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.0/ap1/joe-2.8-292.sparc.rpm d1d70f58df37de53f05734d90be596fa source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.0/zq1/joe-2.8-292.src.rpm 45091ece9cb66e4f093d07b0386fd2b9 AXP Alpha Platform: SuSE-7.0 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/7.0/ap1/joe-2.8-296.alpha.rpm 85e609519bbfbbc0be5aec7b8de2dffc source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/7.0/zq1/joe-2.8-296.src.rpm ce623f8a73b1f6395eb9498324cc1e21 SuSE-6.4 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/6.4/ap1/joe-2.8-293.alpha.rpm d930c6a2f0757f51f04409946f6152f8 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/6.4/zq1/joe-2.8-293.src.rpm 0b20e5bd36f0feeaf78cb4815566e982 SuSE-6.3 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/6.3/ap1/joe-2.8-293.alpha.rpm 6278e4dd4a42d4e091d1a08e3f617fa2 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/6.3/zq1/joe-2.8-293.src.rpm 88f428cc9c916b9159dfb54144c7802e SuSE-6.1 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/6.1/ap1/joe-2.8-295.alpha.rpm 3e531066b0495be2261f02ef2d4583f0 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/6.1/zq1/joe-2.8-295.src.rpm 1d7796f1fad01365e40a944f0db84470 PPC PowerPC Platform: SuSE-7.1 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.1/ap1/joe-2.8-272.ppc.rpm f11094b9f1afeb04786030e3a140ed03 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.1/zq1/joe-2.8-272.src.rpm 4058ea46c9d75976a24a6ac419fc19d5 SuSE-7.0 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.0/ap1/joe-2.8-274.ppc.rpm c385a2ca601cf9b01ad2d39433d6a872 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.0/zq1/joe-2.8-274.src.rpm b667ea68d356a9582d3696ad68869c69 SuSE-6.4 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/6.4/ap1/joe-2.8-273.ppc.rpm 4f6c2c20e961aea4987381d12692af6c source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/6.4/zq1/joe-2.8-273.src.rpm 8c3ebda871c54afc11a24d80d207c34e ______________________________________________________________________________ 2) Pending vulnerabilities in SuSE Distributions and Workarounds: - We are in the process of preparing update packages for the man package which has been found vulnerable to a commandline format string bug. The man command is installed suid man on SuSE systems. When exploited, the bug can be used to install a different man binary to introduce a trojan into the system. As an interim workaround, we recommend to `chmod -s /usr/bin/man´ and ignore the warnings and errors when viewing manpages. - The file browser MidnightCommander (mc) is vulnerable to unwanted program execution. Updates are currently being built. - Two bugs were found in the text editor vim. These bugs are currently being fixed. - A bufferoverflow in sudo was discovered and fixed RPMs will be available as soon as possible. A exploit was not made public until now. ______________________________________________________________________________ 3) standard appendix: SuSE runs two security mailing lists to which any interested party may subscribe: suse-security(a)suse.com - general/linux/SuSE security discussion. All SuSE security announcements are sent to this list. To subscribe, send an email to <suse-security-subscribe(a)suse.com>. suse-security-announce(a)suse.com - SuSE's announce-only mailing list. Only SuSE's security annoucements are sent to this list. To subscribe, send an email to <suse-security-announce-subscribe(a)suse.com>. For general information or the frequently asked questions (faq) send mail to: <suse-security-info(a)suse.com> or <suse-security-faq(a)suse.com> respectively. =============================================== SuSE's security contact is <security(a)suse.com>. =============================================== ______________________________________________________________________________ The information in this advisory may be distributed or reproduced, provided that the advisory is not modified in any way. SuSE GmbH makes no warranties of any kind whatsoever with respect to the information contained in this security advisory. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBOsG6aney5gA9JdPZAQEkMAgAiLgKgaIQS9psq0wwl/RJDaXCKwopeKsx meuZexE+iBgCXEeDAYtsbUEgTtHfTZ7XO5VwsIfFD9r8yOoAxWUcCkmIHOTYlRF3 jC4BTN5PkhbY7JymlSaEIreEfgflNWfYY1soaUm0LYy6Q/jDvMYReMh7uiG3wpPw ja8wiLjJ+PZa7OqtCsk9zTLBmFeTHJJ0mYeiy8qD4xASUW+GY6qE9i9naYrZgN9L oEY6DrOy6RERh35+NKMaI21o+yULhxPcV1AUYUndyc4U3OQErNEoLdViU6F39KeB JA9sgxk8iMvtqEyyCWaWJyRahrzo05gBepjUy+DjTovmJGMOhR+VAg== =58ij -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Bye, Thomas -- Thomas Biege, SuSE GmbH, Schanzaeckerstr. 10, 90443 Nuernberg E@mail: thomas(a)suse.de Function: Security Support & Auditing "lynx -source http://www.suse.de/~thomas/thomas.pgp | pgp -fka" Key fingerprint = 09 48 F2 FD 81 F7 E7 98 6D C7 36 F1 96 6A 12 47

1 0

SuSE Security Announcement: eperl (SuSE-SA:2001:08)
by Thomas Biege 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ______________________________________________________________________________ SuSE Security Announcement Package: eperl Announcement-ID: SuSE-SA:2001:08 Date: Tuesday, March 27th, 2001 16.00 MEST Affected SuSE versions: 6.3, 6.4, 7.0, 7.1 Vulnerability Type: local and remote compromise Severity (1-10): 6 SuSE default package: no Other affected systems: all system using eperl package Content of this advisory: 1) security vulnerability resolved: eperl problem description, discussion, solution and upgrade information 2) pending vulnerabilities, solutions, workarounds 3) standard appendix (further information) ______________________________________________________________________________ 1) problem description, brief discussion, solution, upgrade information The ePerl program is a interpreter for the Embedded Perl 5 Language. It's main purpose is to serve as Webserver scripting language for dynamic HTML page programming. Besides this it could also serve as a standalone Unix filter. Fumitoshi Ukai and Denis Barbier have found several potential buffer overflows, which could lead to local privilege escalation if installed setuid (note: it's not installed setuid per default) or to remote compromise. There is currently no efficient measure against the security problems in the eperl perl interpreter other than not using or updating it. SuSE provides update packages for the defective software. SuSE Linux version before 6.3 don't include the eperl package. Download the update package from locations described below and install the package with the command `rpm -Uhv file.rpm'. The md5sum for each file is in the line below. You can verify the integrity of the rpm files using the command `rpm --checksig --nogpg file.rpm', independently from the md5 signatures below. i386 Intel Platform: SuSE-7.1 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.1/d2/eperl-2.2.14-206.i386.rpm e613b06d47dcfb7bbcea8c3d0c0e678b source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.1/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-206.src.rpm c58a95f3b8ae757ea4d72f3157e2ea62 SuSE-7.0 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.0/d1/eperl-2.2.14-203.i386.rpm e66520cc0062e25495941542dd5b1f82 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.0/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-203.src.rpm 34d6682524154c9fb7b5fbec4f4ea82e SuSE-6.4 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.4/d1/eperl-2.2.14-203.i386.rpm 4b6a5a89899320a8eeb35c149ae111f5 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.4/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-203.src.rpm 062b14716e52f2649f4380a6a6e4e7f9 SuSE-6.3 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.3/d1/eperl-2.2.14-202.i386.rpm ba75d7f4a64329a3b5c324b3f0742575 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.3/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-202.src.rpm c7ae001d4668ba3a0524f94429b1e4e6 Sparc Platform: SuSE-7.1 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.1/d2/eperl-2.2.14-193.sparc.rpm 9752f8b9df6ac1ffdc68cb4b552d6491 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.1/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-193.src.rpm f09a1ce9288c201ae63e193914fc84ce SuSE-7.0 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.0/d1/eperl-2.2.14-191.sparc.rpm 900eddc134215569fc88d11ce14c11f3 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.0/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-191.src.rpm 76aaa0efa8ae1c84b80201f73462fc26 AXP Alpha Platform: SuSE-7.0 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/7.0/d1/eperl-2.2.14-195.alpha.rpm d7b4be8d988f8cd501a33f9d2fb12a07 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/7.0/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-195.src.rpm b0379287f9078fcd244cc720fad92c4d SuSE-6.4 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/6.4/d1/eperl-2.2.14-195.alpha.rpm 78241206bc1b3927effdb5b1aa4d0ed5 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/6.4/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-195.src.rpm 325a04ec8c5c3da6b9c2fdf4e2c6c901 SuSE-6.3 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/6.3/d1/eperl-2.2.14-194.alpha.rpm 88a09004e5c0c2e6174785207e111318 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/6.3/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-194.src.rpm a04cfa3e64aac49f6c148992e9a50189 PPC Power PC Platform: SuSE-7.1 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.1/d2/eperl-2.2.14-178.ppc.rpm 3e05c702aca97db476155054d113ff95 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.1/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-178.src.rpm 67849b0c1c053eca482508fe2eac3042 SuSE-7.0 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.0/d1/eperl-2.2.14-177.ppc.rpm 35584e2f1bcebced98fad2ae241824da source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.0/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-177.src.rpm 98046dce35c4adfba57cc54c018376d7 SuSE-6.4 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/6.4/d1/eperl-2.2.14-176.ppc.rpm 9c36bad7ec2e8f6c31307729c7d21bc8 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/6.4/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-176.src.rpm eeaf1144dd659fe13b6a943bf40bf65b S/390 Platform: SuSE-7.0 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/s390/update/7.0/d1/eperl-2.2.14-182.s390.rpm 416974a30c9c9e435e028f2807e15a51 source rpm: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/s390/update/7.0/zq1/eperl-2.2.14-182.src.rpm b14c7d9cbb969cda54b0d9f599f1b5cc ______________________________________________________________________________ 2) Pending vulnerabilities in SuSE Distributions and Workarounds: - We are in the process of preparing update packages for the man package which has been found vulnerable to a commandline format string bug. The man command is installed suid man on SuSE systems. When exploited, the bug can be used to install a different man binary to introduce a trojan into the system. As an interim workaround, we recommend to `chmod -s /usr/bin/man´ and ignore the warnings and errors when viewing manpages. - The file browser MidnightCommander (mc) is vulnerable to unwanted program execution. Updates are currently being built. - Two bugs were found in the text editor vim. These bugs are currently being fixed. - A bufferoverflow in sudo was discovered and fixed RPMs will be available as soon as possible. A exploit was not made public until now. ______________________________________________________________________________ 3) standard appendix: SuSE runs two security mailing lists to which any interested party may subscribe: suse-security(a)suse.com - general/linux/SuSE security discussion. All SuSE security announcements are sent to this list. To subscribe, send an email to <suse-security-subscribe(a)suse.com>. suse-security-announce(a)suse.com - SuSE's announce-only mailing list. Only SuSE's security annoucements are sent to this list. To subscribe, send an email to <suse-security-announce-subscribe(a)suse.com>. For general information or the frequently asked questions (faq) send mail to: <suse-security-info(a)suse.com> or <suse-security-faq(a)suse.com> respectively. =============================================== SuSE's security contact is <security(a)suse.com>. =============================================== ______________________________________________________________________________ The information in this advisory may be distributed or reproduced, provided that the advisory is not modified in any way. SuSE GmbH makes no warranties of any kind whatsoever with respect to the information contained in this security advisory. ______________________________________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBOsG3GXey5gA9JdPZAQGQtQgAmPBgkp8fCIbo0RJ+mJDa0Zx7W0N8S+Ba LP2tH/cXkW9QPUT5vh1mKbB+LsH6wuG/uv7NG0EMrYHcmy3UFBEFKel4XD4G8XNU BhAKegayEvjYH/OK8q8poVHYdvctrZ00LtfrW7IQkNfCXEVx0ByfaX5w/Qe/GQxQ MWlqdw2klUXpnYZnaYj7mMsdTrc6DrIGdL4uCWozdQcyxGLeh/mQArg4TEdpv7KT OW0LgDgZETo5akS/AwtZn3NE7rh+ZIAUAhPw8iUoK0k6RY+Z+RJa+QFQ+XXv7eHm EXUcUd0wY47j5CROk+g7WzYy92Vn6VVOY63pcbhiv4R8BuPM9WVWJw== =QNk3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Bye, Thomas -- Thomas Biege, SuSE GmbH, Schanzaeckerstr. 10, 90443 Nuernberg E@mail: thomas(a)suse.de Function: Security Support & Auditing "lynx -source http://www.suse.de/~thomas/thomas.pgp | pgp -fka" Key fingerprint = 09 48 F2 FD 81 F7 E7 98 6D C7 36 F1 96 6A 12 47

1 0

Sytem Attack or ?
by Togan Muftuoglu 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Hi everyone Receiving this from the snort can someone explain what the hell is going on I have and ADSL connection on eth1 with dhcp assigned Ip and the lan is on eth0 I am running the snort with -i eth1 as the Daemon with snort-lin defining the HOME_NET 192.168.1.0/24 and EXTERNAL_NET as 212.xxx.xxx.0/22 as outlined with the ifconfig eberything else is left as is. Help is appreciated Mar 27 18:11:49 gardiyan snort: spp_http_decode: IIS Unicode attack detected: 212.xxx.xxx.xxx:61018 -> 195.44.254.18:80 Mar 27 18:12:00 gardiyan snort: spp_http_decode: IIS Unicode attack detected: 212.xxx.xxx.xxx:61019 -> 207.200.86.65:80 Mar 27 18:12:00 gardiyan snort: spp_http_decode: IIS Unicode attack detected: 212.xxx.xxx.xxx:61019 -> 207.200.86.65:80 Mar 27 18:12:02 gardiyan snort: spp_http_decode: IIS Unicode attack detected: 212.xxx.xxx.xxx:61020 -> 207.200.86.65:80 Mar 27 18:12:02 gardiyan snort: spp_http_decode: IIS Unicode attack detected: 212.xxx.xxx.xxx:61020 -> 207.200.86.65:80 Mar 27 18:12:03 gardiyan snort: spp_http_decode: IIS Unicode attack detected: 212.xxx.xxx.xxx:61019 -> 207.200.86.65:80 Mar 27 18:12:08 gardiyan snort: spp_http_decode: IIS Unicode attack detected: 212.xxx.xxx.xxx:61020 -> 207.200.86.65:80 Mar 27 18:12:08 gardiyan snort: spp_http_decode: IIS Unicode attack detected: 212.xxx.xxx.xxx:61020 -> 207.200.86.65:80 Mar 27 18:12:10 gardiyan snort: spp_http_decode: IIS Unicode attack detected: 212.xxx.xxx.xxx:61021 -> 205.188.245.116:80 Mar 27 18:12:10 gardiyan snort: spp_http_decode: IIS Unicode attack detected: 212.xxx.xxx.xxx:61021 -> 205.188.245.116:80 -- Togan Muftuoglu

3 2

Security when compiling App - when do u compile as root or a User
by Steven Thompson 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Hi All When compiling Apps, under which user do you compile the App for security, that does not mess up your system. When do have to compile an App as root? Thanks in advance Steven

3 2

RE: [suse-security] portscannst from many ips to port 16110
by Lewe, Wolfgang 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

> Hi there > is there an new trojan whos listening to port 16110??? > > many portscanns at my side in the last two days Hi Rene, It have not to be an new trojan. It can be an older trojan mapped to the port 16110. Regards, Wolfgang

1 0