March 2003 - openSUSE Security - openSUSE Mailing Lists

When will SNORT-Update (rpm) be available?
by HoneyNet Germany 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Together with the Sendmail Remote Buffer Overflow there has been announced a Snort vulnerablity. But until now no one mentioned this on the list, nor is an update availble. When can we expect an updated Snort 1.9.1 RPM? Ciao Uwe HoneyNet Germany

9 16

SuSEfirewall2 customization
by Dirk Borchers 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Hi to all, I need to modify the rules of the firewall2. What I want is to masquerade all internal machines - but not globally! The basis has to be that nothing will be allowed (except tcp port 80 for http). Every other protocol / port has to added as an extra rule; e.g. if a server with a fixed ip in the internet has to be reached on a certain port. I think I have to include the custom rules (FW_CUSTOMRULES="/etc/sysconfig/scripts/SuSEfirewall2-custom"). Has anyone experience with it? Bye, Dirk

1 0

Re: [suse-security] AW: mal wieder kazaa
by BLeonhardt＠analytek.de 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Hi, wie ist die Default Policy für FORWARD / OUTPUT / INPUT ??? DROP ? Dann solltest du den kazaa - Port zu deinem Rechner weiterleiten lassen .... "Volker Lieder" <v.lieder(a)gmx.de> 10.03.2003 20:20 An: <suse-security(a)suse.com> Kopie: Thema: [suse-security] AW: mal wieder kazaa > Hallo Liste, > ein kleines, aber wahrscheinlich bekanntes Problem. > Ich habe hier eine Suse 8.1 im Einsatz und dahinter einen > WinXP-Rechner mit Kazaa. > Ich habe mir eine eigene Firewall mit iptables gebaut, die soweit > auch funktioniert. > Jetzt habe ich allerdings dass Problem, dass ich mit Kazaa von > dem Win-Client > keine Verbindung bekomme, in den Drop-Regeln aber auch keine > Pakete auftauchen. > Ich weiss dass ich bei Kazaa den Port 1214 brauche, aber in > welche Chain muss > ich den Einfügen und was brauche ich noch? > Namensauflösung vom WinXP funktioniert soweit. > Bin für jede Hilfe dankbar. Ich nochmal selber, habe noch was an den Firewall-Regeln verändert und bekam ein paar logs dazu. Mittlerweile funktioniert Kazaa, habe folgende Regeln hinzugefügt: iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i eth0 --sport 1214 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p UDP -i eth0 --sport 1214 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i eth0 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 1214 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i ppp0 --sport 1214 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i ppp0 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 1214 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p UDP -i ppp0 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 1214 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i eth0 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i ppp0 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT Nun meine Frage... Habe ich durch die letzten beiden Regeln meine Firewall zu sehr aufgebohrt und/oder gibt es eine andere Möglichkeit, das Problem mit Kazaa zu lösen z.B über einen Proxy? Sorry that this mail is in German, i wrote it in another list. The next will be in english ;-) -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands, e-mail: suse-security-help(a)suse.com Security-related bug reports go to security(a)suse.de, not here

3 2

AW: mal wieder kazaa
by Volker Lieder 10 Mar '03

10 Mar '03

> Hallo Liste, > ein kleines, aber wahrscheinlich bekanntes Problem. > Ich habe hier eine Suse 8.1 im Einsatz und dahinter einen > WinXP-Rechner mit Kazaa. > Ich habe mir eine eigene Firewall mit iptables gebaut, die soweit > auch funktioniert. > Jetzt habe ich allerdings dass Problem, dass ich mit Kazaa von > dem Win-Client > keine Verbindung bekomme, in den Drop-Regeln aber auch keine > Pakete auftauchen. > Ich weiss dass ich bei Kazaa den Port 1214 brauche, aber in > welche Chain muss > ich den Einfügen und was brauche ich noch? > Namensauflösung vom WinXP funktioniert soweit. > Bin für jede Hilfe dankbar. Ich nochmal selber, habe noch was an den Firewall-Regeln verändert und bekam ein paar logs dazu. Mittlerweile funktioniert Kazaa, habe folgende Regeln hinzugefügt: iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i eth0 --sport 1214 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p UDP -i eth0 --sport 1214 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i eth0 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 1214 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i ppp0 --sport 1214 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i ppp0 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 1214 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p UDP -i ppp0 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 1214 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i eth0 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p TCP -i ppp0 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT Nun meine Frage... Habe ich durch die letzten beiden Regeln meine Firewall zu sehr aufgebohrt und/oder gibt es eine andere Möglichkeit, das Problem mit Kazaa zu lösen z.B über einen Proxy? Sorry that this mail is in German, i wrote it in another list. The next will be in english ;-)

1 0

strange log
by Dominik Sk?adanowski 10 Mar '03

10 Mar '03

Hi all. During changing my password on SuSE 8.1 Pro, I've noticed line in the log (listed below): mar 7 17:48:06 server_name passwd[8936]: Unknown option: blowhish I think somebody made a little mistake in the word blowfish. -- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dominik Sk?adanowski e-mail: dominik.skladanowski(a)ch.pw.edu.pl ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2 2

Re: [suse-security] how to protect?
by MichaelHoeller＠t-online.de 10 Mar '03

10 Mar '03

Hello David, hello Matthias, hello list, Davids your sugguestions "sound" good to my newbie ears I have reposted it with my remarks. Sorry this got a little bit too long but to cut off your list would have given a wrong picture form your suggestion. Maybe the others can comment it? I am too green in some subjects an need to appologize if the question are not so professional. Right now I work myselfe to the man pages. Guess I need to add some words about the contallation: > > Here is the problem, I need to runn a productive server SuSE 8.0 to which > > real terminals are connected (-> no harddrive) the terminals boot via > > tfpt and mount the certain drives via nfs. For "online"backups I run > > rsync. The server must be reachable for remote maintenance via isdn > > dialin, also telnet and ftp. I need rsync only within the local net to mirror some data of the server. ssh/sftp will only be used by a direct dialin connection form *one* phone number - never via the internet. Does this open an option to close more doors? David M. Fetter wrote: > It sounds like you're trying to really lock down this system. Yes, the server should be as much locked as possible - but still usabel :-) > 1. Install susefirewall, configure it to allow only the tftp terminals > to access the various services you plan to run. This is very important > for portmap/nfs. What about sftp, ssh? > 2. Comment out everything in the /etc/inetd.conf. You didn't mention > anything that you plan on using which exists in this so need to have > unnecessary services available. > 3. Use SSH instead of telnet/ftp. You should also run rsync over ssh > using the "-e" switch with rsync. i.e. Don't run the rsync daemon. I will but would that differ since I use it only within the local net? > 4. Do not allow remote access for root in any case, unless for some > reason it is the only way to accomplish some task (perhaps the > backups?). Instead use sudo and configure it so you can execute > privileged commands with that. If you do have to allow root access, be > very specific where root can login from (i.e. tcp wrappers). I am not sure if this is possible, if a remote connection is needed than in emergency situations where privileged rights are needed. The only things which may could "narrow" the access is that the connection must be a dial in connection via isdn from a certian IP Address in the 192.168.x.x space. > 5. SSH can utilize TCP wrappers so use that as an extra layer to your > firewall. This basically means, edit the /etc/hosts.deny file and put > "ALL:ALL" in it, then edit the /etc/hosts.allow and add in the specific > IP address you want to allow (man 5 hosts_access for more info). > > 6. Disable any services you are not using. Only run the specific > services you need. > > 7. For the dialin, if you use mgetty, there are optional parameters you > can use to tighten down who can connect, etc. You'll need to read up on > mgetty more to figure out what it is you specifically want. Well on an other machine I use mgetty/callback (still analog) and this works fine Though you need to complile mgetty to enable the called-id support to block unwanted calls. But in this case the dialin will be only isdn. > 8. Setup tripwire. What is this? > 9. Setup a good log watcher (i.e. swatch). This is important so you > know what's going on. > 10. Don't run portsentry or IDS on this system itself. If you want to > run these they should be on a separate system. They are good if you > want to see if anyone is probing your network and watch the activity. > 11. Things like chkchroot and chkrootkit are tools which will check your > system for chroot processes or rootkits. If they're installed then > you'll be notified and basically in most cases that means you've been > compromised. I need to read more about it, "chkchroot and chkrootkit" is new to me. -- Encrypted eMail welcome! GnuPG/OpenPGP-Key: 0xC82CD70C. Fingerprint: BB76 0DED 1329 D3B7 04D0 F6BB 2033 3B11 C82C D70C

3 2

how to protect?
by MichaelHoeller＠t-online.de 09 Mar '03

09 Mar '03

Hello, I only have few knowledge in the area of security an so i like to ask for some hint on the expert list - please appologize when the question is not really professional. Here is the problem, I need to runn a productive server SuSE 8.0 to which some real terminals are connected (-> no harddrive) the terminals boot via tfpt and mount the certain drives via nfs. For "online"backups I run rsync. The server must be reachable for remote maintenance via isdn dialin, also telnet and ftp. The temporary connects to the internet for surfing and email should also be possible. What would you suggest to protect the machine? It would be great if you could point me to the right direction that way I can focus on the things which are really needed. Thanks a lot Michael -- Encrypted eMail welcome! GnuPG/OpenPGP-Key: 0xC82CD70C. Fingerprint: BB76 0DED 1329 D3B7 04D0 F6BB 2033 3B11 C82C D70C

4 5

pam_mkhomedir: no recursive copy of template directory?
by Heiko Ettelbrueck 07 Mar '03

07 Mar '03

Hi, on a SuSE 7.2 pro machine, I recently encoutered a problem with the PAM module mkhomedir: I doesn't copy the whole template directory, but only the files and directories (with_out_ contents) directly residing in it. The arguments to the module: skel=/etc/skel/ umask=0022 (like in the documentation (/usr/share/doc/packages/pam/modules/README.pam_mkhomedir). Is this a bug in the pam rpm of SuSE 7.2 (updated with YOU), or did I do something wrong, or does it "work as designed"? Thanks in advance Heiko

1 0

gd2 php Suse 8.1
by Franck 07 Mar '03

07 Mar '03

Hello all, Suse 8.1 included gd 1.8x but i must install gd2. How can i obtain rpm of gd2 ? On suse linux website, there is nothing !!! Help me plizz Best regards -- Franck \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Fingerprint : 20F4 DBE5 7234 52D6 3610 BB17 D73C 1F7A 9E64 F6A1 http://www.linuxpourtous.com \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

2 1

Re: [suse-security] My LAN user can not surfing in internet after a couple of hours.
by Prabu Subroto 06 Mar '03

06 Mar '03

Dear my friend Ian.... Could you tell me mo detail about the steps? If I want to allow this IP (145.253.2.196), what should I do? What is the name and the port number of DNS translation in "/etc/services"? I thought that is 53, am I wrong? --- Ian David Laws <ian(a)the-laws-clan.de> wrote: > On Friday 28 February 2003 13:54, Prabu Subroto > wrote: > SuSE-FW-ILLEGAL-TARGET > IN=ippp0 > OUT= > MAC= > SRC=145.253.2.196 > DST=145.254.88.223 > LEN=96 > TOS=0x00 > PREC=0x00 > TTL=247 > ID=38391 > DF PROTO=UDP > SPT=53 DNS > DPT=1096 Common Name Resolution Protocol > LEN=76 > > > SPT=53 DPT=1096 > If you look hear you are receiving a DNS translation > if you look up the 2 > ports in /etc/services. > The SRC ip address seems to external ISP but with > nslookup I cannot find this > address. If that ip is legal then allow this ip to > come in for DNS. > > Hopefully this will help you further > > Ian __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/

1 0

RE: AW: [suse-security] SuSE Security Announcement: sendmail (SuSE-SA:2003:013)
by GarUlbricht7＠netscape.net 06 Mar '03

06 Mar '03

Hi Uli and Martin --- <... last nite I downloaded the patch for "sendmail" However, i have my copy of "sendmail" turned off, put I was planning to turn it on soon, when I saw Martin's post and wondered how many have switched to Wietse Venema's "postmix, which SuSE has a version for my 8.0 box, and probably for 8.1 too--- i tried to load "postfix" but it conflicts w/send mail -- so .....what to do??? comments, anyone. TIA > "Ulrich Roth" <Roth(a)impact.de> wrote: > >Hi Martin, > >> > SuSE Security Announcement >> > >> > Package: sendmail, sendmail-tls >> > Announcement-ID: SuSE-SA:2003:013 >> >> Does the bugfix "repair" affected messages, so that servers behind a >> patched sendmail are protected? Or are the "bad" headers passed on >> to the next MTA unmodified? > >Yes, the bad headers are passed on. > >Quote from the announcement: > > The vulnerability is triggered by an email message sent through the > sendmail MTA subsystem. In that respect, it is different from commonly > known bugs that occur in the context of an open TCP connection. By > consequence, the vulnerability also exists if email messages get > forwarded > over a relay that itself does not run a vulnerable MTA. This specific > detail and the wide distribution of sendmail in the internet causes this > vulnerability to be considered an error of major severity. > >Bye > Uli >-- >Ulrich Roth >IMPACT Business & Technology Consulting GmbH >Im Mediapark 8 / KölnTurm >D-50670 Koeln >Phone +49-221-93 70 80-29 >Fax +49-221-93 70 80-15 >E-Mail: roth(a)impact.de > >-- __________________________________________________________________ The NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/

9 9

Re: [suse-security] SuSE Security Announcement: sendmail (SuSE-SA:2003:013)
by GarUlbricht7＠netscape.net 06 Mar '03

06 Mar '03

Hi Theo -- I want to thank you, Gour, ckm, Uli and Martin for adding to my knowledge on sendmail. However, I need to correct one error in my earlier post: --- I said I had "sendmail" turned off. That was incorrect ---- I do have it on. As all you linux guru's know, not only was "mail" one of the original unix killer applications, "mail"is still necessary for the health of of and unix/linux machine. Each Linux box needs some way to communicate --whether it be by sendmail, postfix, qmail or one of the other mta's. That is one of the reasons why Christopher Mahmood, in response to Gour's comment that he uses neither sendmail, nor post fix, but rather, qmail <http://www.lwq.org/> quickly wrote a fake_mta package. Aa a safety measure, Yast is set to complain if neither Sendmail nor Postfix are installed. I am sure ckm could have said what I just said better, but I would be a shame if someone read my post, said to him or herself because I am not using "sendmail," and it's a potential security problem, I will just turn it off. ---That would be a bad plan -- Enough said -- Best regards, ~Gar "Theo v. Werkhoven" <twe-suse.sec(a)ferrets4me.xs4all.nl> wrote: >On Wed, 05 Mar 2003, GarUlbricht7 said: > >> Hi Uli and Martin --- >> <... >> last nite I downloaded the patch for "sendmail" >> However, i have my copy of "sendmail" turned off, ---- not true --- it was and is turned on ----- >> but I was planning to turn it on soon, when >> I saw Martin's post and wondered how many have switched to >> Wietse Venema's "postmix, which SuSE has a version for my 8.0 box, >> and probably for 8.1 too--- >> i tried to load "postfix" but it conflicts w/send mail -- >> so .....what to do??? comments, anyone. > >Postfix is a very fast, complete and easily >understandable MTA, with many (very good) anti-UCE options (90% of >the arriving spam here is rejected by Postfix with DNSBL, valid >host/domainname checks, domain blacklist etc.). >The version supplied with SuSe is 1.1.10 afaik, the source on >postfix.org is at 2.0.4 now, with a lot of further improvements and >features. > >Building a rpm for yourself is easy; after 'make', instead of 'make >install' use checkinstall (also on the CDs) and a line for >'provides' (smtp_daemon postfix) to build and install Postfix. >Remove sendmail, change two or three config variables in main.cf >(well documented) and do 'postfix start'. > >I for one will never touch sendmail again after experiencing the >relaxed way in which I can use a complex product like a MTA in the >Postfix way. > >Theo >-- >Theo v. Werkhoven Registered Linux user# 99872 http://counter.li.org >ICBM 52 13 27N , 4 29 45E. >SuSE 8.0 x86 >Kernel k_Athlon 2.4.19-4GB >See headers for PGP/GPG info. > __________________________________________________________________ The NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/

2 1

NAT Problem with VPN
by Junge, Stefan 06 Mar '03

06 Mar '03

Hi, I have created a vpn tunnel with cipe. It still works. My problem : I have a firewall with iptables,vpn (cipe) on a SuSE 8.0 system. I tried to ping a server in my internel network.(10.1.1.1) The server in the internet has the tunnel ip 192.168.0.2 and the tunnel ip on my vpn gateway and firewall is 192.168.0.1. A ping to each site still works fine. The internal server must per reached wit ip 172.20.1.1. I tried to solve the problem with natting. iptables -A INPUT -i INTERFACE -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -s 192.168.0.2 -d 192.168.0.1 -j ACCEPT (For a ping to the tunnel) works iptables -A PREROUTING -i INTERFACE -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -d 172.20.1.1 -j DNAT --to 10.1.1.1 iptables -A FORWARD -d 10.1.1.1 -j ACCEPT This rule does not work. What´s the problem ? Mfg Stefan

1 0

suse doesn't Log successful logins at the console
by Arno Luppold 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi! I want SuSE 8.1 to log successful logins at the console into /var/log/messages. I've set the corresponding option at YaST (at "Security and Users --> Security settings"), but successful logins are only logged to /var/log/wtmp. Can anybody tell me how I can log them to /var/log/messages, please? Thank you very much, Arno -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+ZfzpNWaBQfbZkHYRAj7aAJ0dkFdegFsbD/C74i7bzlrdeb/dZwCfd2uY dKkqMTdDXRyyafCg7EDxNcM= =3EY5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 9

OpenSSH
by Philipp Jenke 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

Hi List! I have a problem with ssh. I reinstalled Suse 8.0 and I have a problem with ssh'ing some computers (strangely some other work), which I did not have before. I always reveive a "ssh_exchange_identification: Connection closed by remote host", when ssh'ing certain machines. Detailed information: >ssh -v fuzzy.mcs.csuhayward.edu OpenSSH_3.5p1, SSH protocols 1.5/2.0, OpenSSL 0x0090701f debug1: Reading configuration data /usr/local/etc/ssh_config debug1: Rhosts Authentication disabled, originating port will not be trusted. debug1: ssh_connect: needpriv 0 debug1: Connecting to fuzzy.mcs.csuhayward.edu [134.154.14.232] port 22. debug1: Connection established. debug1: identity file /home/gandalf/.ssh/identity type -1 debug1: identity file /home/gandalf/.ssh/id_rsa type -1 debug1: identity file /home/gandalf/.ssh/id_dsa type -1 ssh_exchange_identification: Connection closed by remote host debug1: Calling cleanup 0x80642f0(0x0) I thought that the problem might be in /etc/hosts.allow/deny but they look like: /etc/hosts.allow: ALL: ALL /etc/hosts.deny: (no entries) As some ssh connections work. I thought, I might have the wrong version and so I uninstalled the Suse rpms and compiled/installed the newest OpenSSL and OpenSSH versions (3.5), the problem remains the same. An ftp does not work either: > ftp -v fuzzy.mcs.csuhayward.edu Connected to fuzzy.mcs.csuhayward.edu. 421 Service not available, remote server has closed connection. This makes me think it might be a problem with the hosts-files but I can't figure it out. Does anyone know how to help me? Thanks a lot, Philipp Jenke -- ********************* * www.p-jenke.de *********************

5 5

pam_mysql compiled in SuSE 8.1 ?!??!
by Radu Voicu 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

Hi there! Did anyone here compiled pam_mysq in SuSE 8.1 ?!?! ...because I've tried and lots of errors occured... If anyone have the SuSE 8.1 binary for pam_mysql.so v0.5 I BEG him/her to send it to me... I want to try today the Postfix-Cyrus-Web-cyradm and / or the Replex app., so I need this a.s.a.p. Thanks, Radu

1 0

RE: [suse-security] OpenSSH
by Ronny Martin 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

> > I have a problem with ssh. I reinstalled Suse 8.0 and I > have a problem with > > ssh'ing some computers (strangely some other work), which I > did not have > > before. > > > > I always reveive a "ssh_exchange_identification: Connection > closed by > > remote host", when ssh'ing certain machines. You will get this message when your host is not allowed with tcp_wrappers, hope this helps > > You didn't backup your old ssh configuration? Then at least the > host keys and probably the configuration settings have > changed. It could > be that other hosts refuse connections since your host id is > changed and they > think someone is doing a man-in-the-middle attack. Perhaps? > Differences in > default authentication methods and those required by various > hosts could be > a reason too - I guess...

1 0

Elmar Wild/DS/GFK/DE ist außer Haus.
by Elmar.Wild＠gfk.de 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

Ich werde ab 03.03.2003 nicht im Büro sein. Ich kehre zurück am 06.03.2003. Ich werde Ihre Nachricht nach meiner Rückkehr beantworten. I am out of office until March 5th 2003. Please contact one of my colleagues at IT-Communication. In case you need further assistance with the GfK WebMeeting, please contact ebmeeting(a)gfk.com I will get back to you as soon as possible.

1 0

SuSE Security Announcement: sendmail (SuSE-SA:2003:013)
by Roman Drahtmueller 04 Mar '03

04 Mar '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ______________________________________________________________________________ SuSE Security Announcement Package: sendmail, sendmail-tls Announcement-ID: SuSE-SA:2003:013 Date: Monday, March 3rd 2003, 18:10 MET Affected products: 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 8.0, 8.1 SuSE Linux Database Server, SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 7, 8 SuSE Linux Firewall on CD/Admin host SuSE Linux Connectivity Server SuSE Linux Office Server Vulnerability Type: local privilege escalation Severity (1-10): 7 SuSE default package: yes (until SuSE Linux 8.0 and SLES7) Cross References: http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2003-07.html Content of this advisory: 1) security vulnerability resolved: sendmail problem description, discussion, solution and upgrade information 2) pending vulnerabilities, solutions, workarounds: - vnc - w3m 3) standard appendix (further information) ______________________________________________________________________________ 1) problem description, brief discussion, solution, upgrade information sendmail is the most widely used mail transport agent (MTA) in the internet. A remotely exploitable buffer overflow has been found in all versions of sendmail that come with SuSE products. These versions include sendmail-8.11 and sendmail-8.12 releases. sendmail is the MTA subsystem that is installed by default on all SuSE products up to and including SuSE Linux 8.0 and the SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 7. The vulnerability is triggered by an email message sent through the sendmail MTA subsystem. In that respect, it is different from commonly known bugs that occur in the context of an open TCP connection. By consequence, the vulnerability also exists if email messages get forwarded over a relay that itself does not run a vulnerable MTA. This specific detail and the wide distribution of sendmail in the internet causes this vulnerability to be considered an error of major severity. The buffer overflow happens on the heap and is known to be exploitable. As of the writing of this announcement, there is no exploit known to exist in the public. Since there is no known workaround for this vulnerability other than using a different MTA, it is strongly recommended to install the update packages as offered at the locations as listed below. We would like to express our gratitude to Eric Allman for notifying SuSE Security of the problem. The vulnerability was discovered by ISS Internet Security Systems, inc. Please download the update package for your distribution and verify its integrity by the methods listed in section 3) of this announcement. Then, install the package using the command "rpm -Fhv file.rpm" to apply the update. Our maintenance customers are being notified individually. The packages are being offered to install from the maintenance web. SPECIAL INSTALL INSTRUCTIONS: ============================== After performing the update, it is necessary to restart all running instances of sendmail using the command "rcsendmail restart" as root. Intel i386 Platform: SuSE-8.1: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.1/rpm/i586/sendmail-8.12.6-91.i58… 0f3d981ad8e9be64bc70aff474ce303c ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.1/rpm/i586/sendmail-devel-8.12.6-… afe98a29de75ecd362fad5b02a922856 patch rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.1/rpm/i586/sendmail-8.12.6-91.i58… ebd8f188748812aff2830b23de6f34b3 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.1/rpm/i586/sendmail-devel-8.12.6-… 09ff6834c369051d165d78f01a44d684 source rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.1/rpm/src/sendmail-8.12.6-91.src.… 50e471df3a90ce4b54b2c5ca3fbc081e SuSE-8.0: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.0/n1/sendmail-8.12.3-72.i386.rpm 09e0a8ed5b189c7c819d3d38f74a07e1 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.0/d4/sendmail-devel-8.12.3-72.i38… 72a8c31090299df6b7bd52ea38c31c2b patch rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.0/n1/sendmail-8.12.3-72.i386.patc… 905b39525ecd0506892b442a204b7aa3 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.0/d4/sendmail-devel-8.12.3-72.i38… a03e4a221c1fb8f2387dc133ada9e604 source rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.0/zq1/sendmail-8.12.3-72.src.rpm 6e3106de72c4605d379dc2133adba97b SuSE-7.3: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.3/n1/sendmail-8.11.6-162.i386.rpm 9d04ffb6a8d6f1fe6e2efe217de69ad7 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.3/sec2/sendmail-tls-8.11.6-164.i3… ebf8d1b2ef233a68b0326e6ce6974994 source rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.3/zq1/sendmail-8.11.6-162.src.rpm aebf9a30089a13717928e9ba5309a6ed ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.3/zq1/sendmail-tls-8.11.6-164.src… 371e39b10ee7d4c255e96e935c473aa8 SuSE-7.2: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.2/n1/sendmail-8.11.3-106.i386.rpm dbff6db47875bc00a95409cba9498c49 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.2/sec2/sendmail-tls-8.11.3-110.i3… 7c7af39c8179219f6302707ab67bacea source rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.2/zq1/sendmail-8.11.3-106.src.rpm 85ff9f88013f6f0b23ed8fb15704bc82 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.2/zq1/sendmail-tls-8.11.3-110.src… 7502589ff50b89f86398571c5686c23c SuSE-7.1: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.1/n1/sendmail-8.11.2-44.i386.rpm 701f6c5d9748e0b9cd5606cdaaa84cd8 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.1/sec2/sendmail-tls-8.11.2-45.i38… 1583015b284c5166c9bd862c3e24bf14 source rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.1/zq1/sendmail-8.11.2-44.src.rpm b51e8383dc11ca9be65e05ee4209f740 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/7.1/zq1/sendmail-tls-8.11.2-45.src.… 3de4e382d512f6175cc5050d393d76a0 Sparc Platform: SuSE-7.3: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.3/n1/sendmail-8.11.6-63.sparc.rpm 0f70b263b09c319dcf698786b14de86f ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.3/sec2/sendmail-tls-8.11.6-63.sp… e7a3f0c6fadcbaedc9736c2a7a08aa5f source rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.3/zq1/sendmail-8.11.6-63.src.rpm 1a455df96d094008fcd7bc96f49ab938 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/sparc/update/7.3/zq1/sendmail-tls-8.11.6-63.src… 20d1fdca82189f4492a1dd28ba0d7e92 AXP Alpha Platform: SuSE-7.1: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/7.1/n1/sendmail-8.11.2-30.alpha.rpm dfdd75f7e970002742135a5f48c9be71 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/7.1/sec2/sendmail-tls-8.11.2-37.alph… ff6d0889f04eff5564c9e498954f9a85 source rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/7.1/zq1/sendmail-8.11.2-30.src.rpm 92bd9eee0d1b9eac76f4835f4f20dfe2 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/axp/update/7.1/zq1/sendmail-tls-8.11.2-37.src.r… a5e9e67a860bfd6b873cb9d95134405b PPC Power PC Platform: SuSE-7.3: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.3/n1/sendmail-8.11.6-120.ppc.rpm ef7b092c43dddc3fcdfa45946df42232 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.3/sec2/sendmail-tls-8.11.6-119.ppc… 927355dfa069ad1f032a1036ad65fb2c source rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.3/zq1/sendmail-8.11.6-120.src.rpm 35c672698ccaa213c6e42b2888ac24ad ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.3/zq1/sendmail-tls-8.11.6-119.src.… c1ff2ba2174ed85c47fad4149e82e564 SuSE-7.1: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.1/n1/sendmail-8.11.2-33.ppc.rpm d703b68846212626fdf1e1d3e15c733f ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.1/sec2/sendmail-tls-8.11.2-36.ppc.… d98905aaa881fec5684f32ff1d4927de source rpm(s): ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.1/zq1/sendmail-8.11.2-33.src.rpm b582465c56651e15153ad5a0239cea6a ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/update/7.1/zq1/sendmail-tls-8.11.2-36.src.r… f1ef3e9c0f346cf4e7c4f9f70b049878 ______________________________________________________________________________ 2) Pending vulnerabilities in SuSE Distributions and Workarounds: - vnc VNC (Virtual Network Computing) uses a weak cookie generation process which can be exploited by an attacker to bypass authentication. New packages are currently being tested and will be available on our FTP servers soon. - w3m The textbased web-browser w3m does not properly escape HTML tags. A malicious HTML page or img alt attribute may lead to information leakage. New packages will be available soon. ______________________________________________________________________________ 3) standard appendix: authenticity verification, additional information - Package authenticity verification: SuSE update packages are available on many mirror ftp servers all over the world. While this service is being considered valuable and important to the free and open source software community, many users wish to be sure about the origin of the package and its content before installing the package. There are two verification methods that can be used independently from each other to prove the authenticity of a downloaded file or rpm package: 1) md5sums as provided in the (cryptographically signed) announcement. 2) using the internal gpg signatures of the rpm package. 1) execute the command md5sum <name-of-the-file.rpm> after you downloaded the file from a SuSE ftp server or its mirrors. Then, compare the resulting md5sum with the one that is listed in the announcement. Since the announcement containing the checksums is cryptographically signed (usually using the key security(a)suse.de), the checksums show proof of the authenticity of the package. We disrecommend to subscribe to security lists which cause the email message containing the announcement to be modified so that the signature does not match after transport through the mailing list software. Downsides: You must be able to verify the authenticity of the announcement in the first place. If RPM packages are being rebuilt and a new version of a package is published on the ftp server, all md5 sums for the files are useless. 2) rpm package signatures provide an easy way to verify the authenticity of an rpm package. Use the command rpm -v --checksig <file.rpm> to verify the signature of the package, where <file.rpm> is the filename of the rpm package that you have downloaded. Of course, package authenticity verification can only target an un-installed rpm package file. Prerequisites: a) gpg is installed b) The package is signed using a certain key. The public part of this key must be installed by the gpg program in the directory ~/.gnupg/ under the user's home directory who performs the signature verification (usually root). You can import the key that is used by SuSE in rpm packages for SuSE Linux by saving this announcement to a file ("announcement.txt") and running the command (do "su -" to be root): gpg --batch; gpg < announcement.txt | gpg --import SuSE Linux distributions version 7.1 and thereafter install the key "build(a)suse.de" upon installation or upgrade, provided that the package gpg is installed. The file containing the public key is placed at the top-level directory of the first CD (pubring.gpg) and at ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/pubring.gpg-build.suse.de . - 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 announcements 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> or <security(a)suse.de>. The <security(a)suse.de> public key is listed below. ===================================================================== ______________________________________________________________________________ The information in this advisory may be distributed or reproduced, provided that the advisory is not modified in any way. In particular, it is desired that the clear-text signature shows proof of the authenticity of the text. SuSE Linux AG makes no warranties of any kind whatsoever with respect to the information contained in this security advisory. Type Bits/KeyID Date User ID pub 2048R/3D25D3D9 1999-03-06 SuSE Security Team <security(a)suse.de> pub 1024D/9C800ACA 2000-10-19 SuSE Package Signing Key <build(a)suse.de> - -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org mQGiBDnu9IERBACT8Y35+2vv4MGVKiLEMOl9GdST6MCkYS3yEKeueNWc+z/0Kvff 4JctBsgs47tjmiI9sl0eHjm3gTR8rItXMN6sJEUHWzDP+Y0PFPboMvKx0FXl/A0d M+HFrruCgBlWt6FA+okRySQiliuI5phwqkXefl9AhkwR8xocQSVCFxcwvwCglVcO QliHu8jwRQHxlRE0tkwQQI0D+wfQwKdvhDplxHJ5nf7U8c/yE/vdvpN6lF0tmFrK XBUX+K7u4ifrZlQvj/81M4INjtXreqDiJtr99Rs6xa0ScZqITuZC4CWxJa9GynBE D3+D2t1V/f8l0smsuYoFOF7Ib49IkTdbtwAThlZp8bEhELBeGaPdNCcmfZ66rKUd G5sRA/9ovnc1krSQF2+sqB9/o7w5/q2qiyzwOSTnkjtBUVKn4zLUOf6aeBAoV6NM CC3Kj9aZHfA+ND0ehPaVGJgjaVNFhPi4x0e7BULdvgOoAqajLfvkURHAeSsxXIoE myW/xC1sBbDkDUIBSx5oej73XCZgnj/inphRqGpsb+1nKFvF+rQoU3VTRSBQYWNr YWdlIFNpZ25pbmcgS2V5IDxidWlsZEBzdXNlLmRlPohcBBMRAgAcBQI57vSBBQkD wmcABAsKAwQDFQMCAxYCAQIXgAAKCRCoTtronIAKyl8sAJ98BgD40zw0GHJHIf6d NfnwI2PAsgCgjH1+PnYEl7TFjtZsqhezX7vZvYCIRgQQEQIABgUCOnBeUgAKCRCe QOMQAAqrpNzOAKCL512FZvv4VZx94TpbA9lxyoAejACeOO1HIbActAevk5MUBhNe LZa/qM2JARUDBRA6cGBvd7LmAD0l09kBATWnB/9An5vfiUUE1VQnt+T/EYklES3t XXaJJp9pHMa4fzFa8jPVtv5UBHGee3XoUNDVwM2OgSEISZxbzdXGnqIlcT08TzBU D9i579uifklLsnr35SJDZ6ram51/CWOnnaVhUzneOA9gTPSr+/fT3WeVnwJiQCQ3 0kNLWVXWATMnsnT486eAOlT6UNBPYQLpUprF5Yryk23pQUPAgJENDEqeU6iIO9Ot 1ZPtB0lniw+/xCi13D360o1tZDYOp0hHHJN3D3EN8C1yPqZd5CvvznYvB6bWBIpW cRgdn2DUVMmpU661jwqGlRz1F84JG/xe4jGuzgpJt9IXSzyohEJB6XG5+D0BiF0E ExECAB0FAjxqqTQFCQoAgrMFCwcKAwQDFQMCAxYCAQIXgAAKCRCoTtronIAKyp1f AJ9dR7saz2KPNwD3U+fy/0BDKXrYGACfbJ8fQcJqCBQxeHvt9yMPDVq0B0W5Ag0E Oe70khAIAISR0E3ozF/la+oNaRwxHLrCet30NgnxRROYhPaJB/Tu1FQokn2/Qld/ HZnh3TwhBIw1FqrhWBJ7491iAjLR9uPbdWJrn+A7t8kSkPaF3Z/6kyc5a8fas44h t5h+6HMBzoFCMAq2aBHQRFRNp9Mz1ZvoXXcI1lk1l8OqcUM/ovXbDfPcXsUVeTPT tGzcAi2jVl9hl3iwJKkyv/RLmcusdsi8YunbvWGFAF5GaagYQo7YlF6UaBQnYJTM 523AMgpPQtsKm9o/w9WdgXkgWhgkhZEeqUS3m5xNey1nLu9iMvq9M/iXnGz4sg6Q 2Y+GqZ+yAvNWjRRou3zSE7Bzg28MI4sAAwYH/2D71Xc5HPDgu87WnBFgmp8MpSr8 QnSs0wwPg3xEullGEocolSb2c0ctuSyeVnCttJMzkukL9TqyF4s/6XRstWirSWaw JxRLKH6Zjo/FaKsshYKf8gBkAaddvpl3pO0gmUYbqmpQ3xDEYlhCeieXS5MkockQ 1sj2xYdB1xO0ExzfiCiscUKjUFy+mdzUsUutafuZ+gbHog1CN/ccZCkxcBa5IFCH ORrNjq9pYWlrxsEn6ApsG7JJbM2besW1PkdEoxak74z1senh36m5jQvVjA3U4xq1 wwylxadmmJaJHzeiLfb7G1ZRjZTsB7fyYxqDzMVul6o9BSwO/1XsIAnV1uuITAQY EQIADAUCOe70kgUJA8JnAAAKCRCoTtronIAKyksiAJsFB3/77SkH3JlYOGrEe1Ol 0JdGwACeKTttgeVPFB+iGJdiwQlxasOfuXyITAQYEQIADAUCPGqpWQUJCgCCxwAK CRCoTtronIAKyofBAKCSZM2UFyta/fe9WgITK9I5hbxxtQCfX+0ar2CZmSknn3co SPihn1+OBNyZAQ0DNuEtBAAAAQgAoCRcd7SVZEFcumffyEwfLTcXQjhKzOahzxpo omuF+HIyU4AGq+SU8sTZ/1SsjhdzzrSAfv1lETACA+3SmLr5KV40Us1w0UC64cwt A46xowVq1vMlH2Lib+V/qr3b1hE67nMHjysECVx9Ob4gFuKNoR2eqnAaJvjnAT8J /LoUC20EdCHUqn6v+M9t/WZgC+WNR8cq69uDy3YQhDP/nIan6fm2uf2kSV9A7ZxE GrwsWl/WX5Q/sQqMWaU6r4az98X3z90/cN+eJJ3vwtA+rm+nxEvyev+jaLuOQBDf ebh/XA4FZ35xmi+spdiVeJH4F/ubaGlmj7+wDOF3suYAPSXT2QAFEbQlU3VTRSBT ZWN1cml0eSBUZWFtIDxzZWN1cml0eUBzdXNlLmRlPokBFQMFEDbhLUfkWLKHsco8 RQEBVw4H/1vIdiOLX/7hdzYaG9crQVIk3QwaB5eBbjvLEMvuCZHiY2COUg5QdmPQ 8SlWNZ6k4nu1BLcv2g/pymPUWP9fG4tuSnlUJDrWGm3nhyhAC9iudP2u1YQY37Gb B6NPVaZiYMnEb4QYFcqv5c/r2ghSXUTYk7etd6SW6WCOpEqizhx1cqDKNZnsI/1X 11pFcO2N7rc6byDBJ1T+cK+F1Ehan9XBt/shryJmv04nli5CXQMEbiqYYMOu8iaA 8AWRgXPCWqhyGhcVD3LRhUJXjUOdH4ZiHCXaoF3zVPxpeGKEQY8iBrDeDyB3wHmj qY9WCX6cmogGQRgYG6yJqDalLqrDOdmJARUDBRA24S0Ed7LmAD0l09kBAW04B/4p WH3f1vQn3i6/+SmDjGzUu2GWGq6Fsdwo2hVM2ym6CILeow/K9JfhdwGvY8LRxWRL hn09j2IJ9P7H1Yz3qDf10AX6V7YILHtchKT1dcngCkTLmDgC4rs1iAAl3f089sRG BafGPGKv2DQjHfR1LfRtbf0P7c09Tkej1MP8HtQMW9hPkBYeXcwbCjdrVGFOzqx+ AvvJDdT6a+oyRMTFlvmZ83UV5pgoyimgjhWnM1V4bFBYjPrtWMkdXJSUXbR6Q7Pi RZWCzGRzwbaxqpl3rK/YTCphOLwEMB27B4/fcqtBzgoMOiaZA0M5fFoo54KgRIh0 zinsSx2OrWgvSiLEXXYKiEYEEBECAAYFAjseYcMACgkQnkDjEAAKq6ROVACgjhDM /3KM+iFjs5QXsnd4oFPOnbkAnjYGa1J3em+bmV2aiCdYXdOuGn4ZiQCVAwUQN7c7 whaQN/7O/JIVAQEB+QP/cYblSAmPXxSFiaHWB+MiUNw8B6ozBLK0QcMQ2YcL6+Vl D+nSZP20+Ja2nfiKjnibCv5ss83yXoHkYk2Rsa8foz6Y7tHwuPiccvqnIC/c9Cvz dbIsdxpfsi0qWPfvX/jLMpXqqnPjdIZErgxpwujas1n9016PuXA8K3MJwVjCqSKI RgQQEQIABgUCOhpCpAAKCRDHUqoysN/3gCt7AJ9adNQMbmA1iSYcbhtgvx9ByLPI DgCfZ5Wj+f7cnYpFZI6GkAyyczG09sE= =LRKC - -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- - -- - - | Roman Drahtmüller <draht(a)suse.de> // "You don't need eyes to see, | SuSE Linux AG - Security Phone: // you need vision!" | Nürnberg, Germany +49-911-740530 // Maxi Jazz, Faithless | - - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3in Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBPmOqPHey5gA9JdPZAQFzkwf9FIBy7WeLGIHIzVCEhTCcBIFNdaPzew7F njWGSpiHOdsuonxKDf2POEKPp5CZOUco9HNhoQu5vDgcWcdmNm9mxejtCRRuKCtX q8ltxDhtO+r0yt+3IKbeb/QTHvRQ3DVhdc6xLyx5b2AxjycMu5Mc4Ym2wp2ikS+e Pi9LSXIEFngyEH4hwnmHnEAxIahjiyZJ23Qs1pTaVB9g1oaTv7iyXOlPrxf6bsSO 7dLZrXTX0Wt4zmFdqT0zfsODgbjyIKlLQ78oUAM+UEo9ogKjAeqtSjtcPDWUgR4g FoeLYeR1050f5ebBSzAk9V1hX9qFX7DgWBfAmHwk+bOgeGO8zTRycw== =DbG0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

12 16

AW: [suse-security] How to tell if update succeded? [suse-security] SuSE Security Announcement: sendmail (SuSE-SA:2003:013)
by Uli Zug 04 Mar '03

04 Mar '03

On the sendmail.org site I found the following test to check if your hand-patching was successful. I guess that should be the same for the suse patched sendmail. >From sendmail.org: (http://www.sendmail.org/patchcr.html) ------------------ To check whether the new sendmail binary contains the patch, run this command (in the directory where the binary is located): strings sendmail | grep 'Dropped invalid comments from header address' The command must print the string Dropped invalid comments from header address Regards, uli -----Original Message----- From: Sven 'Darkman' Michels [mailto:sven@darkman.de] Sent: Dienstag, 4. März 2003 10:46 To: suse-security(a)suse.com Subject: Re: AW: [suse-security] How to tell if update succeded? [suse-security] SuSE Security Announcement: sendmail (SuSE-SA:2003:013) Sebastian Stadtlich wrote: > Hi > > I did : > > rcsendmail stop > rcsendmail start > > still the header is the same as before... > > sorry. i forgot to write that in the first mail :-( As SuSE only patches the current running version on each distro you have to take a look into the changelog: rpm -q sendmail --changelog there should be something that informs you about the patch. Otherwise check the installed version: rpm -q sendmail if it's the announced version for your SuSE distro (like sendmail-8.12.6-91 for 8.1) you're safe now (as long as someonw who runs sendmail can be safe ;) Regards, Sven -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands, e-mail: suse-security-help(a)suse.com Security-related bug reports go to security(a)suse.de, not here

2 1

ntp blocked?
by Klaus Vink Slott 04 Mar '03

04 Mar '03

Hello I have a 8.1 server standing outside my firewall, protected using YAST with SuSEfirewall. I can reach the server using http and ssh - no problem. But I would like to get xntpd to update the time - Is it then nessesary to adjust the firewall configuration? mejse:~ # ntpdate some.server.dk 3 Mar 21:27:38 ntpdate[2623]: no server suitable for synchronization found I tried to use yast to adjust the firewall by putting "123" or "ntp" into the Expert configuration option. Also tried FW_ALLOW_INCOMING_HIGHPORTS_UDP="ntp" still no luck :-( -- Regards Klaus Vink Slott

3 3

AW: [suse-security] Port forwarding problem
by Schoenwaelder Oliver 04 Mar '03

04 Mar '03

Hi John, first of all thx for your reply. Well, there's nothing wrong with my rules. Except your remarks on stateful inspection. I do need the seperate NAT rule for outbound traffic otherwise it would be natted to eth0 which then would cause errors on senders firewall (packets are sent to "eth1" (DMZ) address but response will come through "eth0" (FW) address). As expected that's all a "nice hidden security feature" of IIS ;-) No, just kidding. IIS is set up to look for "index.asp" pages if a directory is requested, e.g. "http://our.host:50003/directory". It works for requests on port 80 but not for requests on any other port. Having a detailed look at the packets I saw that suddenly requests are "mangled" to port 80. And these requests are not allowed. So if we put "http://our.host:50003/directory/index.asp" it works as expected. Don't ask me why, I don't mind. I search support.microsoft.com but found nothing mentioned concerning this treatment. I know why I like Apache so much, but that's off topic :-) Have fun, Oliver > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: John Trickey [mailto:lists@g4rev.supanet.com] > Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. März 2003 12:59 > An: suse-security(a)suse.com > Betreff: Re: [suse-security] Port forwarding problem > > > Hi Oliver, > > > I have a firewall problem I have resigned on. I hope > there's someone > > out there who can help me and explain what's wrong. > > I do not see much wrong with this. > > > iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -p tcp -s 0.0.0.0/0 -d IP_DMZHOST > > --dport PORTFW -j DNAT --to-destination IP_LAN:80 > > I have used almost identical rules. I do not bother with -s > "any" as its > assumed if omitted and I use --to just because its shorter > :-). So functionally, there is no difference. > > There are 2 areas that may be causing you grief. > > 1) Have you set up the forward table? You will need > iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -p tcp -d IP_LAN > --dport 80 -j ACCEPT and also its inverse. > > Personally I prefer connection tracking so you can do > iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -p tcp -d IP_LAN --dport 80 \ > -m state --state NEW -j ACCEPT > with a global > iptables -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth0 -m state --state > ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT for the return. > > 2) Have you prevented the return packets from being > masqueraded? If not they > will be leaving your firewall with a source IP of IP_eth0. > You need something > like: > iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s IP_DMZ -j ACCEPT > iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE > > > "firewalled" or "proxied" connections. Therefore I put the > following > > rule in place which should SNAT the specific traffic coming > from IIS. > > > > iptables -I POSTROUTING -t nat -s IP_LAN -d ! > 10.0.0.0/8 -j SNAT > > --to-source IP_DMZHOST > > > > I need "-d ! 10.0.0.0/8" option because of our IPSec VPN. But after > > applying this rule nothing works. > > I'm not surprised. By adding this rule you would be creating > a separate NAT > entry for the outbound traffic. > > > In my opinion there must be a general "design" mistake I have made. > > But I don't know which > > I think its only an omission. If you're still stuck, come > back to me on the > list. Don't use direct mail as this address is a spam trap > which throws non > list mail straight into /dev/null. > > John > > -- > Check the headers for your unsubscription address > For additional commands, e-mail: suse-security-help(a)suse.com > Security-related bug reports go to security(a)suse.de, not here >

2 1

RE: [suse-security] SuSE Security Announcement: sendmail (SuSE-SA:2003:013)
by Hemsley, Trevor 04 Mar '03

04 Mar '03

"A patched sendmail server will drop invalid headers, thus preventing downstream servers from receiving them." A non-sendmail relay will not be affected by the problem but will pass on messages containing the headers and that may affect downstream sendmail servers. -----Original Message----- From: Ulrich Roth [mailto:Roth@impact.de] Sent: Tue 3/4/2003 2:25 PM To: suse-security(a)suse.com Cc: Subject: AW: [suse-security] SuSE Security Announcement: sendmail (SuSE-SA:2003:013) Hi Martin, > > SuSE Security Announcement > > > > Package: sendmail, sendmail-tls > > Announcement-ID: SuSE-SA:2003:013 > > Does the bugfix "repair" affected messages, so that servers behind a > patched sendmail are protected? Or are the "bad" headers passed on > to the next MTA unmodified? Yes, the bad headers are passed on. Quote from the announcement: The vulnerability is triggered by an email message sent through the sendmail MTA subsystem. In that respect, it is different from commonly known bugs that occur in the context of an open TCP connection. By consequence, the vulnerability also exists if email messages get forwarded over a relay that itself does not run a vulnerable MTA. This specific detail and the wide distribution of sendmail in the internet causes this vulnerability to be considered an error of major severity. Bye Uli -- Ulrich Roth IMPACT Business & Technology Consulting GmbH Im Mediapark 8 / KölnTurm D-50670 Koeln Phone +49-221-93 70 80-29 Fax +49-221-93 70 80-15 E-Mail: roth(a)impact.de -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands, e-mail: suse-security-help(a)suse.com Security-related bug reports go to security(a)suse.de, not here

1 0

AW: [suse-security] SuSE Security Announcement: sendmail (SuSE-SA:2003:013)
by Ulrich Roth 04 Mar '03

04 Mar '03

Hi Martin, > > SuSE Security Announcement > > > > Package: sendmail, sendmail-tls > > Announcement-ID: SuSE-SA:2003:013 > > Does the bugfix "repair" affected messages, so that servers behind a > patched sendmail are protected? Or are the "bad" headers passed on > to the next MTA unmodified? Yes, the bad headers are passed on. Quote from the announcement: The vulnerability is triggered by an email message sent through the sendmail MTA subsystem. In that respect, it is different from commonly known bugs that occur in the context of an open TCP connection. By consequence, the vulnerability also exists if email messages get forwarded over a relay that itself does not run a vulnerable MTA. This specific detail and the wide distribution of sendmail in the internet causes this vulnerability to be considered an error of major severity. Bye Uli -- Ulrich Roth IMPACT Business & Technology Consulting GmbH Im Mediapark 8 / KölnTurm D-50670 Koeln Phone +49-221-93 70 80-29 Fax +49-221-93 70 80-15 E-Mail: roth(a)impact.de

1 0

Port forwarding problem
by Schoenwaelder Oliver 04 Mar '03

04 Mar '03

Hi list members, I have a firewall problem I have resigned on. I hope there's someone out there who can help me and explain what's wrong. First of all our network looks like this Internet | | Firewall (eth0) NAT for LAN | |-- DMZ (eth1) | | | |-- HostInDMZ (IP_DMZHOST) | |-- LAN (eth2) | |-- HostInLAN (IP_LAN) Firewall is SuSE 7.3, kernel 2.4.16, iptables 1.2.2.60. HostInLAN is W2K Server, II5. What I try to do is to port forward all requests on host IP_DMZHOST port PORTFW to host IP_LAN port 80, meaning forward all request on a special port to internal IIS. Pretty simple and done a thousand times I guess. I already do the same for forwarding request on another port to ssh on another host. But when setting up port forwarding like given below with PORTFW anything else than 80 nothing works. All other necessary rules are in place too, e.g. allow any access from any host/port to IP_DMZHOST:PORTFW etc. iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -p tcp -s 0.0.0.0/0 -d IP_DMZHOST --dport PORTFW -j DNAT --to-destination IP_LAN:80 Any special feature of IIS? I don't see any reason why port forwarding from port!=80 is different to port=80. Of course this works for pure Internet connections only, like CallByCall provides. Due to general NAT of all LAN traffic this doesn't work for "firewalled" or "proxied" connections. Therefore I put the following rule in place which should SNAT the specific traffic coming from IIS. iptables -I POSTROUTING -t nat -s IP_LAN -d ! 10.0.0.0/8 -j SNAT --to-source IP_DMZHOST I need "-d ! 10.0.0.0/8" option because of our IPSec VPN. But after applying this rule nothing works. In my opinion there must be a general "design" mistake I have made. But I don't know which Thx, Oliver

6 7

SuSE on Sparc or Intel Architecture
by david lubowa 04 Mar '03

04 Mar '03

hey guys was wondering if anyone could benchmark or if there is a benchmark for SuSE on Sparc/Intel arch's, i have a project i am working on and i got a couple of Sun boxes at my disposal, the first box i choose was this: http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/lx50/ the kind of load it will have on is basically Mail, and maybe some WWW stuff like webmail. I will have things like Postfix or Exim,Mysql, Apache and some open source stuff from sun e.g iplane ..on this box , i have to explain why i would go for Intel and not sparc i have looked through a couple of benchmarks and Solaris OS is used more as a benchmark on Sparc arch which is kind of biased to me, cause i dont get the results i want has anyone here tested SuSE on both arch's and got good results if so what Apps...where used for the benchmark, and do you guys think the server above can handle about 500-->2000 users who will be popping from this very server. All help is highly appreciated and any suggestions are also welcome. cheers --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more

1 0

critical security problem in sendmail < 8.12.8
by David Huecking 03 Mar '03

03 Mar '03

sendmail.org announced availability of sendmail 8.12.8... Sendmail, Inc., and the Sendmail Consortium announce the availability of sendmail 8.12.8. It contains a fix for a critical security problem discovered by Mark Dowd of ISS X-Force; we thank ISS X-Force for bringing this problem to our attention. Sendmail urges all users to either upgrade to sendmail 8.12.8 or apply a patch for 8.12. Patches for older versions are available. See http://www.sendmail.org/8.12.8.html Up to SuSE 8.0 sendmail was the standard MTA and people upgrading to 8.1 may don't have changed to Postfix. Are the pached or new packages on their way? -- Eat, sleep and go running, David Huecking. Encrypted eMail welcome! GnuPG/ PGP-Key: 0x57809216. Fingerprint: 3DF2 CBE0 DFAA 4164 02C2 4E2A E005 8DF7 5780 9216

2 2

strange passwd entry
by Daniel Lord 03 Mar '03

03 Mar '03

Hi @ all, just want to here some of your opinions. Today I found an entry ein etc/passwd looking like this. <snip> +:::::: <snap> does someone know what this means? Google doesn't enlight me :\ Thanks Daniel -- "Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." --Thomas Jefferson

3 2

VPN with CIPE
by Junge, Stefan 03 Mar '03

03 Mar '03

Hello, I tried to connect a Windows 2000 Client Notebook to my Cipe Gateway. (SuSE 8.0) I have downloaded the software packages for windows 2000 and installed it as described. But it won´t work. My Linux Notebook with the same entries in /etc/cipe/options works fine. Is there somebody with experience concerning cipe and windows 2000 (as client)? Mit freundlichen Grüßen Stefan Junge

1 0

FW_FORWARD_MASQ
by byers 02 Mar '03

02 Mar '03

Hi! I use a Linux SuSE 7.2 as a routeur/firewall connected to internet and an internal network behind it. I would like to forward requests to an internal and masqueraded server (ie.Use a second Web server inside my network using http://my.web.adresse:8080/). I tried FW_FORWARD_MASQ, but it doesn't work (exactly as if I FW_FORWARD_MASQ=""). logs and tcpdump don't see any redirection at all. Here is my firewall2.rc.config. PS : There nothing special in firewall2-custom.rc.config Can you help me ? Thanks, Byers ----------------------------------------------- FW_DEV_EXT="ppp0" FW_DEV_INT="eth1" FW_DEV_DMZ="" FW_ROUTE="yes" FW_MASQUERADE="yes" FW_MASQ_DEV="ppp0" FW_MASQ_NETS="192.168.1.0/24" FW_PROTECT_FROM_INTERNAL="yes" FW_AUTOPROTECT_SERVICES="yes" FW_SERVICES_EXT_TCP="80" FW_SERVICES_EXT_UDP="" FW_SERVICES_EXT_IP="" FW_SERVICES_DMZ_TCP="" FW_SERVICES_DMZ_UDP="" FW_SERVICES_DMZ_IP="" FW_SERVICES_INT_TCP="80" FW_SERVICES_INT_UDP="" FW_SERVICES_INT_IP="" FW_TRUSTED_NETS="" FW_ALLOW_INCOMING_HIGHPORTS_TCP="no" FW_ALLOW_INCOMING_HIGHPORTS_UDP="DNS" FW_SERVICE_AUTODETECT="yes" FW_SERVICE_DNS="yes" FW_SERVICE_DHCLIENT="no" FW_SERVICE_DHCPD="no" FW_SERVICE_SQUID="no" FW_SERVICE_SAMBA="yes" FW_FORWARD="" ################################################### FW_FORWARD_MASQ="0.0.0.0/0,192.168.1.2,tcp,8080,80" ################################################### FW_REDIRECT="" FW_LOG_DROP_CRIT="yes" FW_LOG_DROP_ALL="yes" FW_LOG_ACCEPT_CRIT="yes" FW_LOG_ACCEPT_ALL="no" FW_LOG="--log-level warning --log-tcp-options --log-ip-option --log-prefix SuSE-FW" FW_KERNEL_SECURITY="yes" FW_STOP_KEEP_ROUTING_STATE="no" FW_ALLOW_PING_FW="yes" FW_ALLOW_PING_DMZ="no" FW_ALLOW_PING_EXT="yes" FW_ALLOW_FW_TRACEROUTE="yes" FW_ALLOW_FW_SOURCEQUENCH="yes" FW_ALLOW_FW_BROADCAST="no" FW_IGNORE_FW_BROADCAST="yes" FW_ALLOW_CLASS_ROUTING="no" FW_CUSTOMRULES="/etc/rc.config.d/firewall2-custom.rc.config"

1 0