Slashback: OpenSSH, Bio, Timeliness

Welcome to Slashback, with updates (below) on a handful of recent Slashdot posts. Most importantly, a message regarding OpenSSH 3.3 could save your system from attack -- read it; you might need to pass the word on to your vendor, too.

Things that make you want to bring back thumbscrews. A few days ago, we mentioned the release of OpenSSH 3.3; compared to previous versions, the biggest change in 3.3 is increased emphasis on privilege separation. Today, Theo de Raadt sent word of an OpenSSH vulnerability being worked on by ISS and the OpenBSD team, details of which are expected to be published early next week.

In an announcement sent to bugtraq, he wrote: "However, I can say that when OpenSSH's sshd(8) is running with priv separation, the bug cannot be exploited.

OpenSSH 3.3p was released a few days ago, with various improvements but in particular, it significantly improves the Linux and Solaris support for priv sep. However, it is not yet perfect. Compression is disabled on some systems, and the many varieties of PAM are causing major headaches.

However, everyone should update to OpenSSH 3.3 immediately, and enable priv separation in their ssh daemons, by setting this in your /etc/ssh/sshd_config file:

UsePrivilegeSeparation yes

Depending on what your system is, privsep may break some ssh functionality. However, with privsep turned on, you are immune from at least one remote hole. Understand?

3.3 does not contain a fix for this upcoming bug.

If priv separation does not work on your operating system, you need to work with your vendor so that we get patches to make it work on your system. Our developers are swamped enough without trying to support the myriad of PAM and other issues which exist in various systems. You must call on your vendors to help us."

Theo emphasizes the role of vendor cooperation in making privilege separation work on the full range of systems on which OpenSSH runs. "If the vendors don't start pulling their part," he says in an email, "by the time the bug is posted their customers will be left unprotected. These vendors who do not do the right job and instead just 'sell sell sell' are starting to become annoying. On a lot of systems today, privsep does NOT work well at all. The vendors have not been helping!"

A patched version of OpenSSH could be released as soon as Friday, incorporating vendor patches received by this Thursday.

Read More on Stallman. Vamphyri writes: "Sam Williams, author of 'Free as in Freedom', biography of GNU/Linux founder Richard M. Stallman has gone live with the online free version 1.0 of FAIFzilla.org. The paper pulp version publishers O'Reilly & Associates agreed under the terms of the GNU Free Document License and have their own version up at their site. Williams' site allows for content and corrections to be submitted by readers. He hopes for contributions to be included in later editions of the O'Reilly bio. Also: CGI coders wanted for site enhancement, paragraph and line numbering, searches etc. Maybe a CVS Tree is in order? :)"

"Urpmi Norton" doesn't work for some reason. MrResistor writes "Upon logging in to my computer at work this morning, I was greeted by a virus update notice from McAfee SecurityCenter. The update for today includes W97M/Melissa@MM, and of course McAfees newly manuf^H^H^H^H^Hdiscovered threat, the W32/Perrun JPEG virus (which was also highlighted in yesterdays update). All of the updates in the last week or so have been rated Low or No Threat (except for Perrun, which is "Low On Watch". It seems that in addition to manufacturing new threats, they're also rehashing old threats to keep subscription renewals up. Perhaps it's time for Slashdot to add an Ethics topic?"

Comments

To all the OpenBSD lost its claim posters..

[antis0c]

This could be flamebait, but it should be said.

Consider this, would you rather use an Operating System, where the community just shrugs off the frequently once a week remote holes with simply, "go grab the updates" ..

.. or an Operating System where the community is surprised and in disbelief that a remote hole was found after 5 years which causes entire community to start bitch fights over the right to claim its the most secure Operating System still, despite the fact the remote hole was found by the Operating System developers, and fixed before it has actually been exploited.

You don't have to be Stephen Wolfram to figure this one out.

The Alternative to OpenSSH or SSH (commerical)

[Tadghe]

LSH (http://www.net.lut.ac.uk/psst/)

I love SSH. It's been installed on my boxen (regardless of OS) since it was stable enough to kill off telnet.
My problem with both the announcement as well as the patch is thus.

1. Theo nor any of the posters I've seen are willing to tell us what the hell is broken. Only that we must upgrade. That just don't cut it, I won't blindly patch without an idea of what is broken. The Debian security release summed it up best.

"Theo de Raadt announced that the OpenBSD team is working with ISS
on a remote exploit for OpenSSH (a free implementation of the
Secure SHell protocol). They are refusing to provide any details on
the vulnerability but instead are advising everyone to upgrade to
the latest release, version 3.3.

This version was released 3 days ago and introduced a new feature
to reduce the effect of exploits in the network handling code
called privilege separation. Unfortunately this release has a few
known problems: compression does not work on all operating systems
since the code relies on specific mmap features, and the PAM
support has not been completed. There may be other problems as
well."

2. Sudden, lack of belief in Full disclosure. Am I the only guy who remembers the days before full disclosure? The OpenBSD Security policy ( http://www.openbsd.org/security.html ) is pretty point blank (to quote)
"we believe in full disclosure of security problems. In the operating system arena, we were probably the first to embrace the concept. Many vendors, even of free software, still try to hide issues from their users"
I think posting a "fix" (ok, workaround) and not telling anyone *why* they should use it is "try[ing] to hide issues from their users"

I'll be firing up R.A.T.S and checking out LSH ( http://www.net.lut.ac.uk/psst/ ) (GNU'd SSH2ish) for my needs from here own out.

and yes, this needs a rant tag and yes I know the OSSH and OBSD teams are seperate, but they share enough philosophy and team members that I gather they have the same opinion on security.

Re:The Alternative to OpenSSH or SSH (commerical)

[Eil]

You misinterpreted the entirety what he was trying to say. If I were in a crankier mood I'd ask you if you even read the post.

In a nutshell, he said this:

1. There is an exploitable bug in all current versions of OpenSSH.
2. We're working on a patch, but it's not done yet.
3. When it is, we'll tell you all exactly what was wrong and how we fixed it.
4. In the mean time, you can download the latest 3.3 patch and enable privilege separation to completely protect yourself from the vulnerability.

That just don't cut it, I won't blindly patch without an idea of what is broken.

There isn't a patch yet. Theo clearly stated that a patch and an explanation will be forthcoming at the same time. The whole reason he announced it early is to get admins to fix thier systems before the nefarious hackers could develop an exploit for it. (As another poster noted, it's incredibly easy for a nefarious hacker to develop an exploit if you have the source code to versions of the program with the bug and a version without. That is perhaps one of the few downfalls to open-source.)

You'll save yourself a lot of typing and needless jumping (to conclusions) if you read a bit more carefully next time.

...and my analysis

[joe_bruin]

replying to yourself is always a bad thing, but here goes...

if you cut through the bullshit (theo certainly has an interesting way of putting things), what he's saying is this:

there's a hole in sshd. we are working on a patch. if we release it now, you are all f'd, because all your systems will be compromised before you have time to patch them. we are giving you the next week to update your sshd, so that you are no longer vulnerable when we publish the bug+patch. yes, the new sshd has the bug, but is not vulnerable to it. if we fixed it now, the black hats will diff the results and be able to develop a compromise, and you still won't have a patch. oh yeah, we need your vendors' help so that you're all safe by next week.

make sense?

Re:OpenBSD remote hole?

[evilviper]

I don't have an OpenBSD 3.1 box handy to check to see if priv seperation is enabled by default. However, I know it wasn't on 3.0.

But, we need not jump to conclusions. Theo was saying quite a bit about vendor support, which means he was strugling with the PORTABLE version, he made no mention of the native OpenBSD version, and we have yet to even hear the implications of this bug (hell, maybe it's not exploitable on OpenBSD, just OTHER platoforms running OpenSSH).

Again, don't jump to conclusions.

They Had _Better_ Already Know

[John Hasler]

"Read it; you might need to pass the word on to your vendor, too."

If you need to pass the word on to your vendor you need a new vendor.