On 24-08-17, Brian wrote: > On Thu 24 Aug 2017 at 21:56:51 +0200, Dejan Jocic wrote: > > > On 24-08-17, Brian wrote: > > > On Thu 24 Aug 2017 at 21:31:55 +0200, Dejan Jocic wrote: > > > > > > > On 24-08-17, Brian wrote: > > > > > On Thu 24 Aug 2017 at 21:16:26 +0200, Dejan Jocic wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 24-08-17, Brian wrote: > > > > > > > > The alternative would be to reconfigure rkhunter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You could make a start by purging it from your system. It > > > > > > > performs no > > > > > > > useful function. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Brian. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you explain that bit more, please? > > > > > > > > > > apt-get purge rkhunter. Enough? > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, not really. Why do you think that rkhunter is useless? > > > > > > It does not anything of consequence. > > > > > > -- > > > Brian > > > > > > > Do you find checking for possible rootkits is useless, or you are just > > not happy how rkhunter performs that function? > > A well-documented case of rkhunter discovering a rootkit in the last > ten years (the 1000s of false positives do not count) would go a long > way to establishing its credence, >
So, those in security/forensics who recommend use of rkhunter have just been silly? Interesting. But think that I'll use it anyway, just to be on the safe side. It does not hurt.
