Re: Why is portmap installed by default?

2006-08-24 Thread kevin bailey
Michelle Konzack wrote: > Am 2006-08-20 14:49:53, schrieb kevin bailey: >> Why is portmap installed by default on a vanilla basic Debian Sarge >> install? > > Sorry, but portmap is NOT installed... > > This was changed from Woody->Sarge and I was surprised too, &

Re: Why is portmap installed by default?

2006-08-20 Thread kevin bailey
Mike Hommey wrote: > On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 02:49:53PM +0100, kevin bailey > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Why is portmap installed by default on a vanilla basic Debian Sarge >> install? >> >> As far as I can see this is mainly used by by NFS and NIS - so i

Why is portmap installed by default?

2006-08-20 Thread kevin bailey
Why is portmap installed by default on a vanilla basic Debian Sarge install? As far as I can see this is mainly used by by NFS and NIS - so if we're not using either of these then why should it be installed. I'm asking mainly because chkrootkit is reporting what seems like a false positive due to

Re: closing unwanted ports - and what is 1720/tcp filtered H.323/Q.931

2005-12-16 Thread kevin bailey
Adrian von Bidder wrote: > On Thursday 15 December 2005 23.54, Noah Meyerhans wrote: >> given the choice between having your users use weak but easy to remember >> passwords and having them use complex passwords that they have to write >> down, > > My experience suggests that users use weak passw

Re: closing unwanted ports - and what is 1720/tcp filtered H.323/Q.931

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
> >On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:35:09PM +, kevin bailey wrote: >} hi, >} >} these ports seem to be open by default on a standard sarge setup >} >} PORT STATESERVICE >} 9/tcpopen discard Useless. Turn it off. will do } 13/tcp open daytime

Re: closing unwanted ports - and what is 1720/tcp filtered H.323/Q.931

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
Noah Meyerhans wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 06:46:02PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: >> > It may be nothing. The fact that it showed up as filterd in the nmap >> > output indicates that nmap didn't received a TCP RST packet back when >> > it >> > tried to contact that port. That may mean you

Re: closing unwanted ports - and what is 1720/tcp filtered H.323/Q.931

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
Will Maier wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:35:09PM +0000, kevin bailey wrote: >> these ports seem to be open by default on a standard sarge setup > [...] > > Not a standard, default setup; you've installed and enabled other > services which aren't turned on by

Re: closing unwanted ports - and what is 1720/tcp filtered H.323/Q.931

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
Dale Amon wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:35:09PM +0000, kevin bailey wrote: >> what is >> 1720/tcp filtered H.323/Q.931 > > Are you running any VOIP? H323 is the standard for telephone > interchanges. > >> and how do i turn it off if it is uneccessary. >

Re: closing unwanted ports - and what is 1720/tcp filtered H.323/Q.931

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
Noah Meyerhans wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:35:09PM +0000, kevin bailey wrote: >> the service: >> 443/tcp open https >> is used to protect the webmail service. it is meant to stop the email >> passwords from being sniffed. > > If you're concer

Re: hardening checkpoints

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
Dale Amon wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:27:01PM +0000, kevin bailey wrote: >> 2. firewall >> not i'm not sure about the need for a firewall - i may need to access the >> server over ssh from anywhere. also, to run FTP doesn't the server need >> to b

Re: hardening checkpoints

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
Will Maier wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:27:01PM +0000, kevin bailey wrote: >> now i've generally relied on debian issuing security patches but i >> thought i should be more proactive RE security. > > This is very important, as you're now aware. The most secu

Re: hardening checkpoints

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
tomasz abramowicz wrote: > kevin bailey wrote: >> hi, >> >> was recently rootkitted on a debian machine because i'd left an obscure >> service running. > > which one? > i though it was webmin - but now i'm not so sure - i thought there was a vu

Re: hardening checkpoints

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
Matt wrote: > Kevin - > > kevin bailey wrote: >> 1. before attaching server to network install and configure tripwire. >> >> and could possibly put key executables on to CD-ROM and leave them in the >> server. > In todays same day exploits, using something

Re: hardening checkpoints

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
Alvin Oga wrote: > > > On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, kevin bailey wrote: > >> was recently rootkitted on a debian machine because i'd left an obscure >> service running. > > if you know how they got in .. i assume oyu have since fixed it my guess it was the m

Re: hardening checkpoints

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
> You can limit your FTP server to listen for data connections on a > specific port only (eg, ftp-data, or 20). Then you only have to allow > connections to ports 20 and 21. but after the initial connection doesn't the server then wait for the data connection on a port in a range above 1065? >

Re: hardening checkpoints

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote: > Quoting kevin bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [snip] >> 4. enhance authentication >> >> maybe set up ssh access by authorised keys only - but again this has a >> problem when i need to log in to the server from a putty se

Re: hardening checkpoints

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
> > I suggest you set up host based firewalling, where iptables limits > incoming/forwarding/outgoing traffic to whatever services you are > running. This is especially important if your running a webserver and > allow user cgi uploads, or cgi's with vulnerabilities are already > installed. For ex

closing unwanted ports - and what is 1720/tcp filtered H.323/Q.931

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
hi, these ports seem to be open by default on a standard sarge setup PORT STATESERVICE 9/tcpopen discard 13/tcp open daytime 21/tcp open ftp 22/tcp open ssh 25/tcp open smtp 37/tcp open time 80/tcp open http 110/tcp open pop3 111/tcp open

hardening checkpoints

2005-12-15 Thread kevin bailey
hi, was recently rootkitted on a debian machine because i'd left an obscure service running. now i've generally relied on debian issuing security patches but i thought i should be more proactive RE security. here's my proposed checklist to carry out for securing a domain server - i.e. one which

Re: chkrootkit has me worried!

2005-12-07 Thread kevin bailey
> > (I hope you don't mind if I publish our correspondence in Linux Gazette, > http://linuxgazette.net/ .) > No problem at all. Kevin Bailey -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: chkrootkit has me worried!

2005-11-29 Thread kevin bailey
thanks for the replies. what with it being several different symptoms i tend to think this is not a false positive. cause: this is an old server which has been running for 4 years. i have tried out lots of different things on this server and have made the mistake of leaving unnecessary services

Re: chkrootkit has me worried!

2005-11-28 Thread kevin bailey
and.. :/usr/local/sbin# /usr/lib/chkrootkit/chkproc -v PID 4: not in ps output PID 1769: not in ps output PID 15688: not in ps output PID 15690: not in ps output PID 17760: not in ps output PID 17762: not in ps output PID 21583: not in ps output PID 21585: not in ps output PID 21919: not in p

chkrootkit has me worried!

2005-11-28 Thread kevin bailey
hi, the following output looks like i've been rooted. i'm in the process of moving all services to another machine and restoring from backups etc. could anyone provide any analysis of what attack caused the problem - i would guess that it's possibly something o do with zope. thanks, kev :/usr