Slashdot Mirror


FSF FTP Site Cracked, Looking for MD5 Sums

landley writes "The Free Software Foundation's FTP site at ftp.gnu.org has been "compromised", and they don't seem to have full backups. They've yanked a bunch of recent packages (and their whole alpha.gnu.org ftp site), and when I asked about it they responded 'Our FTP server was compromised, yes. We are beginning to find good MD5sums for files which have not yet been restored, and they will be available again Real Soon Now. If you can provide MD5sums for any of the files listed in MISSING-FILES, it would be very much appreciated.' " Update the FSF has a statement on the FTP site explaining the matter.

16 of 752 comments (clear)

  1. ouch, saw this yesterday by Barbarian · · Score: 3, Informative

    Did you know that some files are just about impossible to get anywhere else?

  2. BSD Ports trees should have them by lactose99 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Taking a brief glance over my FreeBSD server, all of the entries in the Ports tree have the MD5SUMs in the "files" file. The Ports tree includes many many FSF software package installs.

    --
    Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
    1. Re:BSD Ports trees should have them by lactose99 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Oops... its the "distinfo" file that contains the MD5SUMs, not "files".

      --
      Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
    2. Re:BSD Ports trees should have them by mph · · Score: 4, Informative
      As a port maintainer and committer, I can confirm what you say. The recorded md5 signatures are for the distributed source archive (e.g. from ftp.gnu.org, or Sourceforge, or whatever). They are there to ensure that the source has not been tampered with.

      BSD-specific patches are then applied to the downloaded source, but have no implications for the md5 signature that's on file.

  3. Re:Well that's good and all, but by rkz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Crackers exploited this vunerability, there was even a patch available!!

  4. Re:Mirrors? by gearheadsmp · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the fastest of them all?

  5. Status update from FSF on GNU FTP site crack by bkuhn · · Score: 3, Informative

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    To the Free Software Community:

    Summary

    * gnuftp, the FTP server for the GNU project was root compromised.

    * After substantial investigation, we don't believe that any GNU
    source has been compromised.

    * To be extra-careful, we are verifying known, trusted secure
    checksums of all files before putting them back on the FTP site.

    Events Concerning Cracking of Gnuftp

    A root compromise and a Trojan horse were discovered on gnuftp.gnu.org,
    the FTP server of the GNU project. The machine appears to have been
    cracked in March 2003, but we only very recently discovered the crack.
    The modus operandi of the cracker shows that (s)he was interested
    primarily in using gnuftp to collect passwords and as a launching point to
    attack other machines. It appears that the machine was cracked using a
    ptrace exploit immediately after the exploit was posted on bugtraq.

    (For the ptrace bug, an root-shell exploit available on 17 March 2003, and
    a working fix was not available on linux-kernel until the following week.
    Evidence found on the machine indicates that were cracked during that
    week.)

    Given the nature of the compromise and the length of time the machine was
    compromised, we have spent the last few weeks verifying the integrity of
    the GNU source code stored on gnuftp. Most of this work is done, and the
    remaining work is primarily for files that were uploaded since early 2003,
    as our backups from that period could also theoretically be compromised.

    Historical Integrity Checks

    We have compared the md5sum of each source code file (such as .tar.gz, .tar.bz2, diff's, etc.) on ftp.gnu.org with a known good data. The file,
    ftp://ftp.gnu.org/before-2003-08-01.md5sums .asc, contains a list of files
    in the format:

    MD5SUM FILE [REASON, ... REASON]

    The REASONs are a list of reasons why we believe that md5sum is good for
    that file. The file as a whole is GPG-signed.

    Remaining Files

    The files that have not been checked are listed in the root directory as
    "MISSING-FILES". We are in the process of asking GNU maintainers for
    trusted secure checksums of those files before we put them in place.

    We have lots of evidence now to believe that no source has been
    compromised -- including the MO of the cracker, the fact that every file
    we've checked so far isn't compromised, and that searches for standard
    source trojans turned up nothing.

    However, we don't want to put files up until we've had a known good source
    confirm that the checksums are correct.

    Alpha FTP Site

    The Alpha FTP site at ftp://alpha.gnu.org/ has been a lower priority for
    us, but we plan to follow the same procedure there.

    - --
    Bradley M. Kuhn, Executive Director
    Free Software Foundation | Phone: +1-617-542-5942
    59 Temple Place, Suite 330 | Fax: +1-617-542-2652
    Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA | Web: http://www.gnu.org

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQE/OnYb53XjJNtBs4cRAqplAJ95PHJhIwRiwjKBqSIx ZH SVlTOtxACgyouK
    QAfYhiLJcwPHio6fsk+s2uY=
    =DUMO
    - ----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    1. Re:Status update from FSF on GNU FTP site crack by bkuhn · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, the crack was carried out by a local user. We don't know if it was a social engineer or someone who compromised an existing account.

  6. Re:Well that's good and all, but by jpetts · · Score: 3, Informative

    This was modded as informative why? This is what it says on the FSF web site:


    A root compromise and a Trojan horse were discovered on gnuftp.gnu.org,
    the FTP server of the GNU project. The machine appears to have been
    cracked in March 2003, but we only very recently discovered the crack.
    The modus operandi of the cracker shows that (s)he was interested
    primarily in using gnuftp to collect passwords and as a launching point to
    attack other machines. It appears that the machine was cracked using a
    ptrace exploit immediately after the exploit was posted on bugtraq.
    (For the ptrace bug, an root-shell exploit available on 17 March 2003, and
    a working fix was not available on linux-kernel until the following week.
    Evidence found on the machine indicates that were cracked during that
    week.)
    Given the nature of the compromise and the length of time the machine was
    compromised, we have spent the last few weeks verifying the integrity of
    the GNU source code stored on gnuftp. Most of this work is done, and the
    remaining work is primarily for files that were uploaded since early 2003,
    as our backups from that period could also theoretically be compromised.

    --
    Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
  7. Re:the $64,000 question: by prizog · · Score: 4, Informative

    There are backups from before the crack.

    If you want to give FSF $64,000, we could hire someone to implement a better plan. But we're not made of money.

  8. Re:You're Kidding? by pongo000 · · Score: 4, Informative

    You mean, an accounting like this? Seems pretty detailed to me...

  9. RTFA: There *are* backups, and they *did* patch by stewby18 · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...The machine appears to have been cracked in March 2003, but we only very recently discovered the crack.
    [snip]
    (For the ptrace bug, an root-shell exploit available on 17 March 2003, and a working fix was not available on linux-kernel until the following week. Evidence found on the machine indicates that were cracked during that week.)
    Given the nature of the compromise and the length of time the machine was compromised, we have spent the last few weeks verifying the integrity of the GNU source code stored on gnuftp. Most of this work is done, and the remaining work is primarily for files that were uploaded since early 2003, as our backups from that period could also theoretically be compromised.

    (emphasis added). So in other words, they were cracked in the brief space between the exploit post and the patch, and didn't find it right away. Now, they are carefully vetting all their backups from that period to remove any possibility that a compromised backup could be redistributed.

    So, to answer your poorly-researched questions:

    • They have reliable backups of everything, except for those files which, due to their upload time, cannot possibly be considered secure
    • They are systematically verifying the reliability of the files where there could be any doubt

    Which part of this would you not consider a disaster recovery plan?

  10. Re:Mirrors? by wampus · · Score: 3, Informative

    All the mirrors I've checked have placeholders.back-RSN.README, just like the ones at ftp.gnu.org.
    Looks like they don't know how long ago the break-in was, so they pulled the mirrors to be safe.

  11. WTF? by MasTRE · · Score: 4, Informative

    Neither the OP _nor_ the moderator think it important to note in front-page post that the box was compromised in _March_ 2003? Jeez, is this /. or -.?

    --
    Must-not-watch TV!
  12. Re:You're Kidding? by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 5, Informative

    As some other posters in other threads noticed, the FSF does not have full backups because all backups made after early 2003 can be compromised. The crack happened in March, and what they miss is all the stuff that was uploaded after the crack. Backups from before March are available. In this situation no backup strategy at all would leave you with total security after March. The fact that the site was cracked five months ago is a bit scary though.

  13. UK Mirror Service by SamBC · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, I must say that I've never met Mustafa at work... the people who run the UK Mirror Service are, however, there for all to see on the UKMS Crew Page

    In all seriousness, you have until some time tonight (on BST, which is UTC+1) before we should be fully synced, including any files that have been pulled, with the source site. There are some exceptions, but I don't think they will apply in this case. And if any files were compromised, they are compromised on our servers as well.

    WARNING: SHAMELESS PLUG: If you are a fan of the Mirror Service, or even just a user, please note the message on our homepage, as we are about to be able to serve even more users, at higher speeds.