Slashdot Mirror


Gentoo rsync Server Compromised [updated]

costela writes "LWN points out that the Gentoo project fired out an alert about one compromised rsync server." From the message itself: "However, the compromised system had both an IDS and a file integrity checker installed and we have a very detailed forensic trail of what happened once the box was breached, so we are reasonably confident that the portage tree stored on that box was unaffected." Update: 12/03 22:54 GMT by T : One more damage report: gibson writes "The Free Software Foundation recently discovered that its software host site was compromised a month ago. The compromise appears to be the same as the recent attacks on the Debian servers. The site is shut down until Friday while they install replacement hardware and verify the authenticity of the hosted source code."

112 of 600 comments (clear)

  1. well... by neo8750 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    who didn't see this coming? I use gentoo and i figured it was a matter of time before someone did this. I mean haveing a central tree is cool but it does make it more of a target for attacks. I am however glad to see that they took precautions.

    1. Re:well... by ballyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Luckily this "central tree" is actually a distributed mirror, so a simple emerge sync will get your portage tree back in shape if you're one of 20 or so people who happened to sync to this server after it was compromised...

    2. Re:well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And what if syncing to the server installed a compromised "emerge" program?

    3. Re:well... by KentoNET · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The rsync servers are, indeed, mirrors. The mirrors are load balanced through the use of a DNS round robin. The cvs.gentoo.org machine propagates the portage tree throughout the rotational rsync mirrors, so any portage tree attack would need to be taken either on most of the rsync mirrors or on the cvs machine. This single attack (had anything actually happened) only affected 20 users.

      --
      "You tried your best and failed miserably. The lesson is...never try. Heh!" -Homer
    4. Re:well... by Theatetus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Somebody mod that tinfoil-hat-wearing parent post up.

      Download gentoolkit and emerge from a current server and validate the checksum. Manually build them. Then emerge sync. Then emerge -u world. Anything less is just trusting that the attackers couldn't cover their tracks well.

      --
      All's true that is mistrusted
    5. Re:well... by RedHat+Rocky · · Score: 3, Informative

      The rsync servers sync with...rsync!

      So, yes, changes in the source rsync tree would trickle down to all the mirrors. It wouldn't actually compromise those servers, in the root-on-the-box sense, but they would be serving compromised data.

      --
      Anything is possible given time and money.
    6. Re:well... by unixbob · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Even if you didn't RTFA, at least RTFP.

      However, the compromised system had both an IDS and a file integrity checker installed

      The file integrity checker will have provided a list of the files that changed and if emerge was compromised then Gentoo would have let you know. After all, they haven't kept the compromise quiet so presumably they are informing users to let them know the Gentoo are on top of things.

      --
      The Romans didn't find algebra very challenging, because X was always 10
    7. Re:well... by Amgine007 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And who doesn't see this coming again? All you need is a box with some bandwidth, and you can become a gentoo mirror.

      Now, you want to compromise every gentoo box on the planet? Edit any ebuild you want to add your compromise. Make it break out of the gentoo sandbox and erase that system straight from the ebuild. Or make it install a tainted binary. Whatever, just be sure to re-hash your ebuild in the Manifest, and wait for some poor suckers to download it. Given the frequency with which gentooer's rsync, this should happen very quickly.

      There is abosolutely _ZERO_TRUST_ in the gentoo system, and it is frightening how easily a rsync mirror could abuse whatever clout it has to taint a significant number of hosts.

      The solution for this is signed digests and shared trusted gentoo keys, but this is still a ways off.

    8. Re:well... by Amgine007 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >> There is abosolutely _ZERO_TRUST_ in the gentoo
      >> system
      > Don't you mean "total trust" in the system, in that the
      > users "trust" the rsync servers not to be r00t3d,
      > somewhat optimistically?

      Doh! But yes, that's what I meant in my somewhat hasty response. (I have been thinking about gentoo and this for a while.)

      Gentoo would be ideal with a web of trust, such that a gentoo deployment maintained keys that it trusted -- ie, from gentoo, from developers, from friends, etc, and accepted and rejected ebuilds accordingly. Considering the development distribution of gentoo, it is almost a case study in how to build and use a mini public key infrastructure.

      The whole gentoo tree could be viewed as as many 'virtual' trees as you desire, by multiple signatures on single or multiple ebuilds: for example, instead of setting "~x86" (experimental x86 ebuild) from within the ebuild, why not sign the ebuild with the gentoo_experimental_x86 key? Then, sign it with a "testing" or "stable" key as it fits.

      With keys from developers (gpg message signing is already a big habit on gentoo-dev), you can accept patches from developers and other people you trust, even if you receive the ebuild out of band (eg, on bugzilla). All of this also removes the posibility of, say, an errant CVS commit. Now all you trust is those public keys (and however many signatures you require on an ebuild to believe it wasn't porrly signed.)

      (Of course, verifying signatures adds more complexity to the build time, but... this is gentoo! You love the build time!)

      cheers.. (a gentoo user)

    9. Re:well... by Blkdeath · · Score: 2, Informative
      And what if syncing to the server installed a compromised "emerge" program?

      Because, save for an attacker compromising all Gentoo workstations and altering the Portage application itself, this is not plausible. `emerge sync` updates only the tree of ebuilds - text file application install scripts, analagous to Makefiles. The process is quite similar to BSD's `cvsup` process. The only files modified in this process are contained in /usr/portage/ (or another location optionally configured by the user). The `emerge` program itself is contained in /usr/bin, and is not touched by the rsync process.

      Sorry to tear that nasty gash in your tin-foil hat, though.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    10. Re:well... by yosemite · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well what if they comprimised the file integrity checker *checker*? or the backup file integrity checker checker *checker*. Or what if they hacked the matrix and made you stupid.

    11. Re:well... by Xabraxas · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Edit any ebuild you want to add your compromise. Make it break out of the gentoo sandbox and erase that system straight from the ebuild. Or make it install a tainted binary.

      You make it sound so easy. Just "break out" of the sandbox and erase the system. No system is ever going to be 100% secure, but things like sandboxing make it safer. I'll take my chances with Gentoo. The RPC exploits alone have convinced me to never even look at a Windows box again. It's just too much hassle.

      --
      Time makes more converts than reason
    12. Re:well... by FxChiP · · Score: 3, Informative

      ... No modding up necessary.

      emerge sync doesn't touch emerge. Basically, all emerge sync does is get a listing of the Portage tree and fetch the latest ebuilds, and delete whatever is old. The only thing emerge sync does in relation to emerge itself is tell you that a new version is available if there is one.

    13. Re:well... by unixbob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So they compromised the server, cleared down some of the logs, but weren't able to completely hide the intrusion, but still managed to compromise the file integrity checker and the source code for emerge?

      This being the same file integrtity checker that alerted the sys admins to the compromise in the first place? If you are good enough to compromise Tripwire or AIDE or whatever then you are good enough to hide the fact that you have done it, not remove some logs install a rootkit then get found out by the IDS.

      Perhaps you should FT

      --
      The Romans didn't find algebra very challenging, because X was always 10
    14. Re:well... by Rich0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Uh - have you read the recent linux weekly news which praises the gentoo community for their unusually high level of support?

      I hate to respond to such a silly flame - but this is really unfounded.

      The parent's attitude hardly reflects that of most people running gentoo. A simple browse of the gentoo forums would demonstrate this.

      How exactly is gentoo harming linux anyway? Because some idiot compromises a server? A server whose admins apparently knew what they were doing and had it offline within an hour? Whose admins were thoughtful enough to have significant IDS capabilities installed so they can verify that the whole portage tree is still intact? Last time I checked, the FSF wasn't able to do that in a few hours, and I'd hardly argue that they're doing linux a disservice!

  2. All this bad news. by iantri · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Lately there has been a lot of bad news about Linux.. SCO, Red Hat's discontinuing of the Red Hat Linux line, the Debian server compromise.. now this.

    A conspiracy theorist could have a field day..

    Now where did I put my tin-foil hat?

    1. Re:All this bad news. by bytesmythe · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Don't forget when gnu's servers were compromised a few months back...

      A conspiracy theorist could have a field day..

      Is it sad the first thing that crossed my mind was "lots of well-timed security breaches... Microsoft may be behind them all"? ;)

      --
      bytesmythe
      Hypocrisy is the resin that holds the plywood of society together.
      -- Scott Meyer
    2. Re:All this bad news. by ChesireKat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Perhaps I'm wrong, but I believe you have no IDEA what you are talking about. There has been no more bad news than normal about linux. Again, perhaps I'm wrong, I'm always open to other's opinions. There always has been, and always will be, bad news about linux. Just like windows. And Macs, too for that matter. It's totally offtopic.

      Also, what does SCO have to do with the Debian Server compromise? those are two TOTALLY different subjects. You can't group them all in the same "bad news" categories! One has to do with security, the other with the corporate-world. Again, totally offtopic!

      --
      ~Just keep eating, porky. Fat people are harder to kidnap.
    3. Re:All this bad news. by iantri · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Also, what does SCO have to do with the Debian Server compromise? those are two TOTALLY different subjects. You can't group them all in the same "bad news" categories! One has to do with security, the other with the corporate-world.

      Yes, I can. Both give Linux a negative image to people that aren't as clued in about this sort of thing, which is were Linux needs the most support.

    4. Re:All this bad news. by penguin+king · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah... it was probably SCO: "ooops.... I think I hacked someone" "shit.. what now?" "new lawsuit.. they're runing our rootkit!"

    5. Re:All this bad news. by cgenman · · Score: 5, Funny

      Is it sad the first thing that crossed my mind was "lots of well-timed security breaches... Microsoft may be behind them all"?

      Come on. Do you really think Microsoft knows that much about security?

    6. Re:All this bad news. by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A conspiracy theorist could have a field day..

      Uh....Ok. I'll bite. Top three theories about why all the Linux bad news.
      Number 3: Some companies that got in early on are outgrowing their business models and thus adapting.
      Number 2: Some companies with REALLY flaky software and business models are trying to figure out how to use other peoples superior software to increase their own revenue.
      The number 1 reason....: How much fun can it possibly be to say "I did a google search on Windows Exploits and owned 1000 boxen in just under an hour" as opposed to " I heard about an SSH2 compromise and searched for 2 weeks and found an affected system, gained access. Found another program with an exploit kit, eventually gained root. All in all it took a week."

    7. Re:All this bad news. by You're+All+Wrong · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have received >2000 sobigs from >1000 IP addresses.
      There's your 1000 rooted boxes, and I didn't even need to do it myself.

      YAW.

      --
      Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
  3. How do they know? by iantri · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "However, the compromised system had both an IDS and a file integrity checker installed and we have a very detailed forensic trail of what happened once the box was breached, so we are reasonably confident that the portage tree stored on that box was unaffected."

    IANAH (hacker), but isn't the first thing you do when you break into a system to 'fix' the logs?

    How can they guarantee the tree hasn't been affected? Compare it with another copy?

    1. Re:How do they know? by Feyr · · Score: 4, Informative

      remote logging

    2. Re:How do they know? by mahdi13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can 'fix' logs, but you can't fix all the md5sums that are scattered around the internet

      --
      "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
    3. Re:How do they know? by agurkan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      An intrusion detection system, e.g. snort, can send the logs offsite, so compromising a machine does not always allow you to wipe the logs. The people who administer these machines probably know what they are talking about, and they have little incentive wrt prop. software guys to lie about their system safety. Debian guys came forward with all details, I believe Gentoo people would not tell lies about security breaches either.

      --
      ato
    4. Re:How do they know? by DA-MAN · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know about this specific setup, but it is standard operating procedure to set up a bastion (read hardened) host that just runs syslog and nothing else for the purpose of logging what goes on in a central location.

      In addition, they can just rsync the portage stored on that box to another to see if any changes were made.

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
    5. Re:How do they know? by pete-classic · · Score: 3, Informative

      By "file integrity checker" I presume they mean something like AIDE.

      One makes hashes of each file and stores them on a non-networked system and/or read-only media. Then periodically runs a check (hopefully from a statically linked binary that is also on RO media) on the files and compares the hashes.

      If they match (and any number of other conditions are met, like the machine and the media the hashes were stored on are physically secure, etc.) you can say with reasonable certainty that the files are unmolested.

      -Peter

    6. Re:How do they know? by Our+Man+In+Redmond · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd just set up a remote box specifically for logging and connect it to a cheapo dot-matrix line printer and have the logs printed to paper. Yeah, you might use a bunch of paper, but it also might come in real handy if you ever need to figure out what really happened to your box.

      --
      Someone you trust is one of us.
    7. Re:How do they know? by Stonent1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      remote logging

      Do you mean that people don't use line printers any more???!!? Back in the good old days, (not really) we'd have the computer print the diffs of any files that ever changed on the system in real time!

  4. Re:Wanna bet... by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is it even a linux box? Just because it's part of the gentoo rsync respository network doesn't mean it's running gentoo, or indeed linux.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. Pointy-Hat theory time.. by msimm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Either hackers have decided they *hate* OSS (not likely) or someone is putting up a purse trying to damage the OSS communities security image.

    --
    Quack, quack.
    1. Re:Pointy-Hat theory time.. by molafson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Either hackers have decided they *hate* OSS (not likely) or someone is putting up a purse trying to damage the OSS communities security image.

      Or (C) None of the above. To want to crack something you don't need to hate it (or to be paid to hate it). The possibility of finding vulnerabilities is tantalizing enough on its own. To crack something that big would be a major black-hat ego trip, don't you think?

    2. Re:Pointy-Hat theory time.. by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think part of this can be attributed to the fact that OSS and Linux is gaining popularity. While it isn't probebly the whole reason, there is a certain amount of truth to being in the spot light more and being a bigger target. I'm sure there will be more of these stories in the future. It's only natural to get more attention when you winning a popularity contest. :)

      --
      ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
    3. Re:Pointy-Hat theory time.. by Martigan80 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can agree to this in a way. Just because someone like an Alternate OS does not mean that they are ignorant about Linux, after all it's well documented!

      --
      This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
  6. Deliberate attacks? by Realistic_Dragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I just threw away my tinfoil hat and made a new one out of steel. With a spike on top.

    Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is some one playing silly buggers.

    (Kernel.org, debian.org, gentoo.org - all in the same two months?)

    --
    Beep beep.
    1. Re:Deliberate attacks? by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 3, Interesting
      You see it every few years. I remember back in '98 everyone was getting rooted because of bugs in named. Later it was Apache. They come in waves as the crackers figure out new patterns of exploits, and like all of the other "fad" break-ins they are going to come to a crashing end after a quick code review.

      Whoever is behind this is showing off for sure.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    2. Re:Deliberate attacks? by caluml · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think the moral of the story is not to have a .org top level domain.

    3. Re:Deliberate attacks? by You're+All+Wrong · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's more than one person behind this.
      Nearly the same time that Debian's boxes were rooted, a
      "friend of Debian" had his system rooted too, and the
      exploits and rootkits used were very similar, as the
      sysadmins compared notes. However, they were subtly
      different and the most likely explanation is that the
      two hackers knew each other, and exchanged some
      information, but weren't the same person.

      YAW.

      --
      Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
  7. Time to Switch to Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    They haven't had a break in two weeks!

  8. Debian, Gentoo.... who's next? by Goyuix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Any bets on which major distro will be next? Better yet, instead of point spreads on professional sporting events - Vegas should be taking bets on which distro (or well established free software org) gets rooted next...

    First Debian, now Gentoo... Slackware perhaps? Maybe install a spam-bot on a knoppix image?

  9. Re:Wanna bet... by KentoNET · · Score: 4, Informative

    The kernel exploit was a local one. Evidence has shown that the exploit used against the rsync server was remotely exploited. Good thing that if anything had happened (which nothing has shown up yet, according to the #gentoo-dev channel on FreeNode), it would have only affected about 20 users. Still sucks that there's an exploit at all though.

    --
    "You tried your best and failed miserably. The lesson is...never try. Heh!" -Homer
  10. Re:windowsupdate.microsoft.com Breakins? by TWX · · Score: 4, Funny

    "How come we never hear about breakins [at windowsupdate.microsoft.com]..."

    Because we wouldn't have time for all of the other news.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  11. On the bright side... by Chalybeous · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... they DO have records of what was done and were able to isolate it pretty quickly. IMHO, that's probably saved them a lot of trouble.
    Whether it's because the cracker was sloppy or inexperienced, or because the Gentoo team have good server security, I can't say - but it seems they were pretty lucky compared to Debian.

    What baffles me is why crackers go after targets like this. I can understand anticapitalist stuff, but my intuition says someone trying to crack a *nix server and damage a distro must have detailed knowledge of *nix systems - and is therefore likely a user of an OpenSource operating system.
    Is that guess a little too far off base? If so, what's your take?

    --

    "It is dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue." -- Zork

    1. Re:On the bright side... by zangdesign · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What baffles me is why crackers go after targets like this.

      Because some individuals are asshats, that's why. You could create the cure for cancer and some asshole would try to shoot it down just because it's there. After all, we are the same species that nailed some poor bastard to a cross just because he said we should all get along for a change.

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
    2. Re:On the bright side... by Our+Man+In+Redmond · · Score: 4, Informative

      OK, I RTFA and it doesn't look to me like they were going after Gentoo specifically. The way I read it, this was just a box somewhere that a sponsor had set up to house a Gentoo rsync node, and had a bunch of other stuff on it as well. The box got rooted and the cracker didn't touch any of the other stuff on the box -- just what he needed to obfuscate his entry and do all the usual rootkit stuff.

      Why do they do this? Because they can. Personally, I blame that darn rap music.

      --
      Someone you trust is one of us.
    3. Re:On the bright side... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thats a lame excuse. If these so called "asshats" can crack a distro, so can other malicious folk, and so on. If a distro can be cracked, it very likely will be. You have to assume a malicious adversary when dealing with electronic security.

  12. Linux vs M$ breakins. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    break in to Debian, it was notices within 24 hours. Break into Gentoo, noticed in 1 hour. Break in to Microsoft, not noticed for MONTHS.

    1. Re:Linux vs M$ breakins. by espo812 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      break in to Debian, it was notices within 24 hours. Break into Gentoo, noticed in 1 hour.
      These are breakins to project servers - a handfull at best.
      Break in to Microsoft, not noticed for MONTHS.
      This was a breakin to a campus and national network of thousands of nodes. It's quite a bit more complicated and thus difficult to monitor everything going on on the Microsoft network than what happens on a few servers.
      --

      espo
    2. Re:Linux vs M$ breakins. by Anonymous+Chicken · · Score: 5, Funny

      Break in to SCO... priceless...

      --
      This signature is intentionally left blank.
  13. Firstly, get used to it by Nijika · · Score: 5, Interesting
    These things just happen. What I'm more impressed with is the detailed reports of the breakins. I mean you're going to have compramises, if you're on the Internet, try as you might to stop them dilligently. The important thing now is making sure you know when somebody's on the inside when they shouldn't be. And even more props if you make the knowledge public so that it gets harder and harder to break in.

    To those who aren't intentionally trying to troll.. and computer journalists;

    Yes, Linux servers can be compramised.

    No, the sky is not falling.

    No, it's not the end of Linux or open source.

    --
    Luck favors the prepared, darling.
  14. Exactly. by twoslice · · Score: 5, Funny
    I am however glad to see that they took precautions.

    Now consider what would happen if the Windows update service was compromized and hackers managed to get past Microsoft's tight security. These update servers could be used for WMD's (Windows Massive Disruptions)...

    --

    From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
  15. Re:windowsupdate.microsoft.com Breakins? by JeffMagnus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd like to see at least one credible report of a breakin at Windows Update. If someone can provide one you will forever earn my eternal respect.

  16. How about a logging trail by phorm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Leading to the hacking machine? Fixing the compromises on major linux servers is one thing, but why has nobody mentioned finding the perpetrators?

    Anything in these logs on the source of the hacks? Probably another hacked machine, but perhaps it can be traced to a source.

    Also, in any package that were compromised or attempted at, what is being inserted? Perhaps we can use it as a honeypot to catch a hacker?

    Perhaps 2.4.23 should have a kernel allowance for a log that tells when somebody was trying to use the =2.4.22 exploit (or does it)?

    1. Re:How about a logging trail by japhering · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because it is d*mn hard to prove who was actually sitting at the keyboard when the attack was successful. One hacker has already escaped jail time by simply claiming his machine was hacked by a third party without his knowledge

    2. Re:How about a logging trail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh sweet, so now IPTABLES can mangle, drop, and reject SYSTEM CALLS?

    3. Re:How about a logging trail by kasperd · · Score: 4, Informative
      Perhaps 2.4.23 should have a kernel allowance for a log that tells when somebody was trying to use the =2.4.22 exploit (or does it)?

      It doesn't have, but would be trivial to implement. Here is my suggestion how a patch for that should look (untested):
      diff -Nur linux.old/mm/mmap.c linux.new/mm/mmap.c
      --- linux.old/mm/mmap.c 2003-12-03 23:20:57.000000000 +0100
      +++ linux.new/mm/mmap.c 2003-12-03 23:23:22.000000000 +0100
      @@ -1059,8 +1059,12 @@
      if (!len)
      return addr;

      - if ((addr + len) > TASK_SIZE || (addr + len) < addr)
      + if ((addr + len) > TASK_SIZE || (addr + len) < addr) {
      + printk("do_brk: %d (%s): uid=%d euid=%d brk=%08lx\n",
      + current->pid,current->comm,
      + current->uid,current->euid,brk) ;
      return -EINVAL;
      + }

      /*
      * mlock MCL_FUTURE?
      --

      Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
  17. This reminded me that.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I needed to upgrade my kernel and I'm guessing that by the now deathly slow speed of kernel.org, I wasn't the only one that remembered its time to get the latest stable. There should be a new name for this effect.

  18. just inevitable by gearheadsmp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's just inevitable that a high-profile Gentoo server got broken into. I use Gentoo for my desktop, but if I were in a business environment, I'd stick with Redhat or SuSe. Gentoo has always been an enthusiast's distribution. I personally hold Gentoo and Debian in as high regard as one another, and Gentoo is just my personal preference. Both have excellent package managers. Behaving a as a Zealot, whether for Debian, Gentoo, Slackware, or for a religion just makes you look like a blind fool.

  19. Re:The only reason this is news... by kayen_telva · · Score: 5, Insightful

    no, its news because a very popular linux dist has been hacked which could effect a lot of people. that = news

    damn microsoft bashing wannabee

  20. leads... by happyfrogcow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Leads? I'll just check with the boys back at the crime lab. They got 3 more detectives working on the case. They got us working in shifts!
    -The Big Lebowski


    Seriously though, I would hope that organizations like Debian or Gentoo would have the brain power and tech resources to find a few leads that results in arrests. But why do I doubt that anyone will ever be arrested for any of these types of attacks?

  21. Faking a forensic trail would make little sense... by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

    IANAH (hacker), but isn't the first thing you do when you break into a system to 'fix' the logs?

    Yes, but I think SOP would be to do a little Jedi handwaving "There was no breach". So if they have a good forensic trail, it's either a) real or b) fake. But why create a fake one, if they could have erased it properly? The only reason would be to hope that the box would be apparently fixed, but in reality still rooted. However, as the article said, after the investigation is done it'll be wiped and rebuilt, which is how it should be.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  22. Information wants to be free. by pete-classic · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Does anyone have an old, cached copy of the DNS record for rsync.gentoo.org?

    Diff it against what's out there now and we're only a quick trip to http://arin.net/whois from knowing who it was . . .

    -Peter

    1. Re:Information wants to be free. by someonehasmyname · · Score: 2, Informative

      He's trying to figure out what unnamed company provided the hacked box.

      --
      Common sense is not so common.
  23. DARL! Turn that computer off and go to bed! by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 3, Funny

    "I told you before to stop playing and go to sleep!
    You just wait until your father gets home!"

  24. Re:The only reason this is news... by NialScorva · · Score: 2, Insightful

    also because there's something there to comprimise. If I crack gramma's win98 machine, there's not a lot I can do with it except use it as a relay to attack spamhause.

    Do worms count as a comprimise? I can't see any possible way that you couldn't count them, and I can't see any possible way that linux would have more comprimises in a year than any of the latest worms would generate in a month.

  25. Seperate Log Server by EXTomar · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is no sure thing in security but there is a simple step to make things a bit more reliable for logging.

    If you really have a serious system where you want detailed logs you keep the logs for that system off that machine. Sure the machine that is logging could have been comprimized as well but that is twice as much work. Now you have to hack the machine but also the logger to erase the intrusion event.

    In fact one of the things I've seen done is that events are logged on the machine and the logger. The idea was to provide not only redundant logging but also provide a front for hackers. A hacker would see the local logs and be too busy doctoring up those logs to check to see if there is an external logger.

    In any event, the logging Gentoo did looks complete enough. They claim only 20 users did a sync against the server during the hour it was online and comprized.

  26. 'Cause of the 'severity' by Nijika · · Score: 4, Insightful
    In OUR community this is a major thing. For everyone else on the planet this crime rates just under Grandma Smith's lawn gnome being stolen and then used in a bizarre series of cross country photos. Even I tend to forget this often, but then I remember.. *sigh*.

    PS, full props for the Lebowski quote!

    --
    Luck favors the prepared, darling.
  27. Re:windowsupdate.microsoft.com Breakins? by Tuba · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're not likely to hear of it if one happens, as a general policy large companies a don't disclose such information to the public. Even the small-ish place where I work wouldn't.

    --
    We're sysadmins, to us, data is protocol overhead.
  28. Re:"Reasonably Confident"? by RedHat+Rocky · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This would be fine assuming no software was emerged, if one of those 20 happened to 'emerge -u system' and there WAS packages amiss, that would be bad and not cleaned up by an emerge sync.

    Would be a good thing to see if notifying those 20 people was possible.

    --
    Anything is possible given time and money.
  29. gpg sign the bloody emerge files? by tomstdenis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why not?

    You take the keys of the developers [or even a cvs key] and then sign all the emerge files. There are only like 2000 new ones a day so at about 50ms a signature [for a really slow box] that's only 100 seconds of time [two minutes not much].

    That way if the end user downloads compromised emerge files they could detect them.

    Damn... I'm like a genius.

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    1. Re:gpg sign the bloody emerge files? by keesh · · Score: 3, Informative

      This one's been in development for a while, and will be going live soon probably. Read GLEP 14,

  30. What OS was the compromised box running? by Zapdos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of the servers that makes up the rsync.gentoo.org rotation was compromised. This box is not an official Gentoo infrastructure box and is instead donated by a sponsor. The box provides other services as well and the sponsor has requested that we not publicly identify the box at this time.

    While it may run Gentoo, it is not stated as such, and could be very well be something else.

  31. Not as big as previous posters make it sound. by jmanning · · Score: 5, Informative

    To correct a few misconceptions in the previous comments.

    It was not their server that was compromised, just a third party server in a round robin rotation. They don't own it, they don't maintain it - just someone else who donated server space.

    The primary or master server is not accessible to users, it was not compromised, and so none of the original source files had a chance to be changed.

    Only the 20 users that synchronized to this server even have a tiny chance of getting bad files. Having everyone sync now that this server is out of the rotation will immediately fix the problem.

    Full disclosure 24 hours later. I give them a lot of credit for such a quick response and disclosure. This is very, very minor.

    ~J

  32. Re:The only reason this is news... by mahdi13 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Only 20 people sync'd with this server within that hour it was compromised...not a big deal, expecially when the compromise did not touch the portage tree and was mearly a rootkit install and some logs edited...not to mention it is a donated server used for other purposes, the attacker might not of even known it was used for Gentoo rsync...
    But the server is down and will be scrubbed and re-sync'd, just to be safe

    --
    "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
  33. Re:The only reason this is news... by htmlboy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Get your facts right:
    "Linux is successfully compromised more than any other operating system". Mostly due to people setting it up straight out of the red box without adequately Reading The Fine Manual.

    facts are tricky like that:
    "We don't know how many total servers the numbers were gathered from or what percentage of those servers is Linux vs. Windows, etc. It is safe to say that these results are true for the servers they monitor, but the percentages may not be true for all servers across the globe."

    while there certainly exist a large number of linux machines that have been compromised, i can't imagine the number of infected linux machines is anywhere near that of the win32 systems infected by blaster/welchia/code red/nimda/sql slammer/klez/dumaru/sobig/etc. in the same time frame. i suppose the counting in this case depends quite a bit on the counter's definition of "compromised."
  34. Conspiracy, FUD, and Open Source by Jumper99 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So I've been lurking around here long enough to spot certain trends. (Warning: generalizations ahead)
    OSS advocates love to hate Windows
    OSS advocates gloat when a new hole turns up in Windows
    OSS advocates point to the number of worms, virus, etc in Windows and say, "Never us"

    Then several OSS distros have a security breach in a short space of time.

    OSS advocates respond with "Must be a conspiracy against us by some evil entity", "Hey, look how quick we caught it", "It would have been much worse with Windows".

    Time to face facts gents. Windows is attacked FAR more than OSS. Why? Well, yes, it is full of holes. But downtown Philly is riddled with abandoned houses with no locks on the doors but they never get broken into. Why? No value in doing so. Not enough damage, headlines, misplaced glory, etc. But the main reason is that it is the dominant OS out there. I fear that we will see more and more attacks against OSS with it's growing popularity. If we all get our wish and 'nix takes over Windows dominant market position and is running on 90% of desktops, you will most likely find it a target for constant attacks like Windows has now.

    We all know in order for 'nix to make it to the desktop, it has to become WAY more user friendly. Can't have Grandma trying to recompile the kernel now can we? User friendly unfortunately translates into users being able to do things that comprise security. Like opening attachments, downloading Trojans, etc. Then the great security built into the OS goes right out the window. no pun intended).

    So before you all start crying about conspiracies, et al, just remember that we all may be victims of our own push to make the 'nix stuff more popular. By bragging about how secure it is, we just may be attracting the type of attack that is more sophisticated then the script kiddies attacking Windows. I imagine it's cool to brag to your friends that you broke into a Windows box. I imagine it's much cooler to brag that your rooted a Linux distro. Badge of honor and all that.

    --
    The opinions expressed here are not mine, but those of these dang voices in my head.
    1. Re:Conspiracy, FUD, and Open Source by oo_waratah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While I don't disagree with the sentiments there are some fundamental problems with your argument.

      Linux/Unix is fundamentally secure, windows is fundamentally open designed as a disconnected workstation and slowly being secured. This is NOT Microsofts fault for marketting reasons they have to move the code base slowly or there are too many problems.

      The value in breaking into Windows is a staging point for other attacks. Kind of like a window above a presidental convoy. You can bet those downtown lockless doors would be secured if the head of state of anything wanted to drive through it. The point is that Internet snipers can hide anywhere.

      Gandma and gradpa will not compile the kernel. They will use the standard upgrade path of binary packages. They will trust the source computer has not been compromised as Microsoft users trust the Microsoft site is not compromised.

      There will be more holes found in Linux / Unix as they become more known. The reason, simply is honesty, FOSS sites report it and commercial entities hide it. I am not pointing at any one company it is a general truth.

      The line I like seeing with this breakin is that this was noted by a checking program. This is what we like to see, expect a break in and buy a burglar alarm. (Also remember a burgler alarm can be comprimised!)

    2. Re:Conspiracy, FUD, and Open Source by Darth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Linux/Unix is fundamentally secure, windows is fundamentally open designed as a disconnected workstation and slowly being secured. This is NOT Microsofts fault for marketting reasons they have to move the code base slowly or there are too many problems.

      I'm going to disagree with the absolute statement that this isnt Microsoft's fault. I agree that the design of Windows not taking into account network security issues at it's inception is not their fault. it wasn't on the radar as an issue facing personal computers when windows was originally written.
      However, building products you are going to market as a server that don't take into account network security is absolutely their fault.
      Building applications that are designed to be used across a network (like IE and Outlook) and not seriously considering the security threat to the system that they create is their fault. Actively adding features to those applications that hamstring any attempt to secure the machine is their fault.
      Claiming your stuff is secure while trying to crush anyone who exposes that it isnt; that's their fault too.

      So there's plenty of security related issues with Microsoft that absolutely are their fault.

      Gandma and gradpa will not compile the kernel. They will use the standard upgrade path of binary packages. They will trust the source computer has not been compromised as Microsoft users trust the Microsoft site is not compromised.

      This is a great reason why security issues with computers used in the upgrade path should be disclosed quickly and the clean up process should be transparent.

      The honesty of OSS groups to disclose information about vulnerabilities is one of it's strengths.

      --
      Darth --
      Nil Mortifi, Sine Lucre
  35. Re:Question from non-hacker by pagaman · · Score: 2, Informative

    Simply put, Gentoo didn't own the machine, there are lots of "rsync" servers that people use (like web sites, but used for downloading files only). Because the people who run gentoo don't own the server, they aren't responsible for it. All this leaves me with a very uncomfortable feeling. I have some websites running on linux servers (not mine) from rackspace providers. Should I be worried ? No! Gentoo is really a desktop OS. Your websites will not be affected. In fact from the sounds of things no one will of been affected, just the 1 server.

  36. Re:I KNOW WHAT HAPPENED by Dylan_t_p · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "I KNOW WHAT HAPPENED (Score:-1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 03, @03:01PM (#7621231) I know one of the gentoo developers and he has logs of the attack, and the attacker was using a compromised machine in Saudi Arabia for the hack. He actually left a trail in some of the files to say things like "jihad vs. gentoo and america" etc." looks like another islamist plot to overthrow linux

    MAN! if the terrorists are in on this, and since this is obviously a microsoft plot microsoft must be terrorists....... AH second hand information, "i know this guy who knows this guy who works at this company and this is what he said" :) by the way i know this is a troll but it's one of the funnier things I've seen today

  37. Re:So... by Bombcar · · Score: 4, Funny

    I though the Gentoo Zealot response would be:

    "Ah, but Gentoo's root exploit was compiled from source, so Gentoo got rooted 0.000000124% faster than Debian!"
    :D

    Ah well, I like Gentoo myself. It is quite fun.

  38. Gentoo! by PatrickThomson · · Score: 5, Funny

    rooted 1% faster than a binary install!

    With apologies to Torne, from whom I stole this quote.

    --
    I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
  39. Re:windowsupdate.microsoft.com Breakins? by jrcamp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Comparing WindowsUpdate to the portage tree isn't quite an accurate analogy. Portage is distributed to a number of 3rd party donors/volunteers who look after the servers. It's not like the Gentoo team looks after them.

    A better analogy would be to ask how many times the update sites for RedHat, Mandrake, etc. etc. has been broken into, since the main update locations are kept up by their respective corporations. I have no idea what the answer to this is.

  40. When, not if by Midnight+Warrior · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IDS is placed on a system to follow an attack. Audit trails on sensitive machines reveal all commands executed, to the detail you desire.

    Here is the point. Bruce Schneier says that the important part of security is not that you were compromised, but rather that you can react within a time frame to keep the damage to acceptable levels. If you can tolerate having your system compromised for weeks, don't invest in a lot of security. The short response time (2 hours at 11pmEST) here indicates that the Gentoo administrators care about responsiveness enough to check on it frequently.

    When the CVS gateway to Bitkeeper on the Linux Kernel was compromised, the developers of Bitkeeper were able to show that they care enough about security that they invested in many checks and balances that caught the error immediately. Since then, Bitkeeper developers, interested in protecting their good reputation (which is VERY difficult to replace), are considering even more drastic measures.

    As a bonus, some cracker spent a good few days or weeks writing this exploit. We get to keep it and deploy the solution with little hassle. And the compromised system, because good security practices are in place, was mitigated to minimize damage.

    Read Schneier's book Secret and Lies to find out how security is really a process. Yes, I know it's a plug, but I just thought the book hit-home to the real point - "When, not if" you get compromised.

    Several other posts here hint that the world will think less of Linux for this. False. True CIOs should see that Linux has the tools to completely identify and contain attacks. Every CIO knows attacks cannot be stopped, but rather they must be contained to acceptable levels.

  41. Re:The only reason this is news... by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 4, Informative
    Do worms count as a comprimise? I can't see any possible way that you couldn't count them, and I can't see any possible way that linux would have more comprimises in a year than any of the latest worms would generate in a month.
    The study referenced above is from mi2g, a company that is known for reports that overstate risk and damage (hey, they sell security services), and is not considered a particularly good source. Moreover, they counted only attacks on servers (without a clear definition of what a server is) and only "successful and verifiable" attacks. How they got those numbers again is not explained in any of the online articles, and neither is what constitutes an attack (A ping? A portscan? A DOS attack? Or a remote root exploit?).

    So anyways, they did not count (most) worm incidents, as they would happen on non-server windows machines.

    That does not mean that Linux boxen should not have better default security settings, of course.

    --

    Stephan

  42. Debian vs. Gentoo... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I know I'm going to be modded into the basement, but does anyone else note the extreme difference between when the Debian server was rooted and the Gentoo? Gentoo knew in an hour. They had all of the monitoring tools installed. They even had a list of everyone who had pulled from the machine, and a rough idea of what was done and not done on the server.

    Good luck catching your buglar. I want to know how to patch my box.

    --
    "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
    --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    1. Re:Debian vs. Gentoo... by Fubar420 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not to criticize (and I am a Deb fanatic, so excuse if i get a little zealous), but the box wasn't gentoos'

      Don't get me wrong, they did a _FANTASTIC_ job catching the break-in, but at the end of the day, there's a good chance the IDS was installed by the people who OWNED the box, and not Gentoo proper.

      While I'd hope and expect the box was running gentoo, there's no evidence of this, nor of it having been Gentoo's work that caught on.

      I fully believe in full disclosure of break-ins (though a delay on revealing vuln's is fair in some MAJOR cases, it should still be done), and they did everything they should have.

      Debian caught it within 24 hours, GNU within a month, MS's last breakin that i can recall, took months.

      It's not about what OS, but the administrators.

      If your admin doesn't take proper precautions for a highly visible boxen, then these things will happen.

      Sure the breakin likely could've been prevented had they been uuber up-to-date, but really, the problem is inherent with OSS

      Again, I disclaim. OSS is a Very Good Thing, BUT, because of this, vuln's are posted far more often than with CSS (no, not style sheets).

      Because of that, the patch-turnaround time is much smaller with OSS, and we as admin's who love our linux/bsd/OSX boxen MUST stay on top.

      I dont have a regimented update schedule for my personal box, even though I should, but because vulns' are usually found and widely publicized very quickly in this world, the users do have to take more precautions.

      If nothing else, this indicates a need for a clearing house (other than ones that tend to be used exclusively by those that seek to find vulns), with links to patches, packages, etc for various distros could be a very good thing.

      Security.debian.org is a good example, but as recent times have shown, even debian isn't perfect (as much as I tell others it is :-D)

      Love your distro, tend to your boxen, but admin like you could be hacked tomorrow. As gentoo/gnu/debian/MS/*BSD have demonstrated in the past, it can and WILL happen to your box.

      I still see regular hist on apache for old IIS vulns. People wouldnt try it if there werent still vulnerable people, and the worms couldnt try it if they'd ever been cleaned properly.

      It's not about OS.
      It's not about vulns.
      It's not even about the hackers.
      It's the admin's who defend these boxes.

      So to the recent distros, Deb & Gentoo alike, I salute the admins who have done a great job keeping the public informed to potential problems. I only hope that when I finally get out of this bloody school, I'll be half the admin that these guys have working for them.

      --
      -- (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
  43. Look at this in a positive way by perf_monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's face it, no OS is 100% secure. Operating Systems that are more secure than others still need to be on their toes. One security exploitation on a Linux box can still be as dangerous as a thousand (an underestimated ratio I'm sure) exploitations on a Windows box. However, I will take the body of security knowledge surrounding an OS to be as valuable as the initial security design principles in the OS in the first place; with that in mind, many Open Source OS's come out looking pretty good. I trust the Linux community to grind down and fix security problems and not sit around and emphasize the numerous security in a Microsoft product. If you're concerned, then help out developers by testing the software and reporting bugs. You could even code a few patches yourself, that being the whole point of community-based development.

    Whether or not there is a deep and dark plot to root big Linux boxes is irrelevant. This is another opportunity to demonstrate the Open Source community's response to security issues to the rest of the computing community. If the heat is really on and this is not just another artifact of news gatekeepers getting over-zealous on a trend, then so be it. It is an opportunity to review and evolve Linux's security as well as the security processes that surround it.

    One of the things I admire most about Linus Torvalds is his steadfast commitment to the quality of his product. It is a commitment that is focused on constant improvement, not PR damage control. I'm sure the real security guru's are sitting with a bit more comfort knowing their servers are running Linux.

    Disclaimer: This post contains no constructive content whatsoever, swallow two tablespoons of salt and call me in the morning.

  44. I'm reminded of a cliche... by acidtripp101 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The death of one is a tradegy, but the death of millions is a statistic

    For all of you that are curious, this isn't a BSD troll (although it could be...).
    My point here is that whenever a larger *NIX server is broken in to, there are ALWAYS people that comlain about "the insecurity of *NIX". Well, when ONE large *nix server is broken in to, it makes it to the front page of slashdot, whereas blaster/sobig/etc usually get a story or two.
    This is where the quote above comes into play.
    Linux might look insecure, but that's because we usually hear about breakins on a 1 server basis. When we here about Windows, it's usually in the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS (if not more). If there was a slashdot story for every one of THOSE servers, then it would appear the way it actually is.

    --
    Not Free(as in beer). Free(as in "I'm free to beat you over the head for being a dumbass")
  45. Re:Question from non-hacker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Is it not possible at all to secure a server ?

    The old adage goes something like: the only safe computer is unplugged, encased in concrete, and buried at a radioactive waste site.

    It sounds like the admins at this place were doing a good job, hence catching the break-in in 1 hour and having a log trail of what happened. The interesting thing will be when they find out the exploit used to get in. The Debian rooting caused a new kernel version, because the flaw was found to be in the Linux kernel. Hopefully we'll soon know what weakness the attacker used in this case, and another hole will be filled.

    Security is never perfect. You worry based on your risk level. The defence department is not allowed to put any classified information on a public network for that very reason. This is why Slashdot panics over Internet-Ready weapon systems, and electronic voting: they put something significant or dangerous at risk. On the other hand, if it's just your blog and photo album, then are you worried about a compromise?

    There's also exposure level. There are hundreds of people trying to break into Microsoft, or the DoD. The very best people will put their best effort into it. Smaller sites mostly get script kiddies. The tools they use are based on known exploits, which have probably already been patched. So unless you really offend someone, patching will keep most of us out of trouble.

    This break-in will cause one more security flaw to be fixed, and the world will be a little bit safer, for now.

  46. The real question is... by beattie · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... did whoever did this steal any of our source code?

  47. Re:Debian, Gentoo.... who's next? - OpenBSD ??? by rosie_bhjp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You'd think but www.openbsd.org doesn't run OpenBSD. Here's a link that explains why.
    In fact, just last year ftp.openbsd.org did get compromised!

    --
    A radio maverick jumps to internet only. The Future of Rock n Roll
  48. How about spammers? by swb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you buy the idea that spammers are behind many of the recent worm/viruses, designed to turn machines into spam zombies, it's also probably reasonable to conclude that Windows isn't exactly a reliable platform to trojan; I'd bet a lot of trojans fail to infect properly simply due to Windows problems. And then there's the problem AV software, many of the machines being behind firewalls/NAT and being unreachable. And then there's people turning their PC's off when they don't use them.

    OSS machines, however, are a much more reliable computing environment, meaning that any trojans are actually like to work, and work well. And I'd also wager that many OSS machines are used AS firewalls or bastion machines, and if compromised are easily accessable for spamming or use as stepping stones to other machines. And many of these machines are always on -- you don't have to worry about lack of reliability from disabled machines.

    This makes more sense to me than any other conspiracy.

  49. Savannah.gnu.org was hit as well by presroi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    http://savannah.gnu.org/statement.html

    On December 1st, 2003, we discovered that the "Savannah" system, which is maintained by the Free Software Foundation and provides CVS and development services to the GNU project and other Free Software projects, was compromised at circa November 2nd, 2003.

  50. Re:The only reason this is news... by Rodrin · · Score: 2, Informative

    The server wasn't actually running Gentoo Linux from what I have read.

  51. Re:The only reason this is news... by Blkdeath · · Score: 5, Insightful
    As well, this isn't "just another exploit for Explorer/Windows/Linux/whatever," this is someone gaining access to THE source code server. I don't seem to recall too many stories where MS had their main code repository compromised, do you?

    Since Gentoo doesn't have a "THE" source code repository, I'm afraid you've got some facts to get straight, Herr Coward.

    The mirror had read-only rsync access to Gentoo's primary (US) mirror. Even if the tree were compromised, the changes could not propagate into the main tree. For that, one would require CVS access to the CVS repository, against which the primary rsync server is synchronized.

    This was only posted as a matter of keeping our user community, and the OSS community as a whole informed.

    Also, I believe the announcement gave mention of it, but the Portage tree on the primary mirror was re-created from the CVS repository immediately upon being notified that a mirror was compromised. Within 30 minutes, every Gentoo rsync mirror had a fresh copy of the tree automatically (as stated by Gentoo rsync mirror policy, mirrors are updated every 30 minutes in order to remain on the official rotation).

    Sorry for the confusion, all, but there's really nothing to see here. But it was good clamouring practise for when/if a real Gentoo server is compromised. ;)

    --
    BD Phone Home!

    Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

  52. Honest answer by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.winnetmag.com/windowspaulthurrott/Artic le/ArticleID/41035/windowspaulthurrott_41035.html

    During an oddly-underpublicized security Webcast Monday, Microsoft revealed that hackers subject the company to 2500 to 3000 electronic attacks every day, or over 100,000 a month. Yet despite this massive number of attacks, the last successful intrusion occurred over three years ago, during the infamous October 2000 security breach. But the software giant says the biggest security risk to the company isn't external electronic attack of its Web properties, but rather its huge fleet of mobile workers and partners--some 60,000 strong--that access the company's 175 remote access points on a regular basis.

    We've taken a deep look inside Microsoft to see how we can improve security at every level," sad Mike Nash, the vice president of the Security Business Unit at Microsoft, during the Webcast. "A lot of the technology we use Microsoft applies directly to [customers'] work."

    Microsoft revealed some other interesting statistics during the Webcast. The company uses Computer Associates' eTrust security management suite to secure its networks. It uses two-factor authentication (user name/password and smart card) to better secure its intellectual property.

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
  53. Hypocrisy alert by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I love it.

    I've pointed out before that Windows is way more widespread than Linux, and so is more attacked and vulnerable, but then zealots come on and say Apache is the most-used on the net and yet not the most breached. But to this, it's already the most-breached operating system.

    Hoot and holler about the reasons all you want, but them's the facts.

    We REALLY, REALLY need to stop with the "Linux is invincible, Windows sucks" attitude. It's flat-out not true, and it's severely holding the community image back in the minds of the rest of the rational computing world who just uses what they use to get the job done and don't treat operating systems like religious belief systems.

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
    1. Re:Hypocrisy alert by dmaxwell · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ...and don't treat operating systems like religious belief systems.

      I really don't want to be a smartass here but could this be a case of the pot calling the kettle black? You don't seem at all Overly Critical when something bad happens to Windows. Indeed, your posting history is largely criticisms of Linux. I could exchange every instance of Windows and Linux in a typical posting of yours and you would come off exactly like one of the "Linux religious fanatics" you claim to be above.

      You also seem to think the most vocal and rabid Linux users are typical users. Every community has extra obnoxious members and Windows is not exempt from the vocal religious fanatic problem. And yet, no one speaks of obnoxious Windows users being the biggest problem dragging Windows down. Could it be that telling amorphous groups like "Windows users" or "Linux users" how to behave is a largely useless activity? Could it even be that "the way members of foo act" is in no way a valid criterion for assessing a technology?

  54. Re:What OS was the compromised box running? by MrHanky · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Yes.. but think again.. rsync.gentoo.org runs a round robin type load sharing system so there could be a hundred servers under that domain. You just netcrafted one or the control host.

    A Netcraft search for rsync.gentoo.org shows more than one server. Two of them run Gentoo, two run Red Hat, one runs Debian, three run unknown Linux, and one runs FreeBSD (some of the servers are listed twice). There are more servers (14, if one is to believe 'host rsync.gentoo.org|wc -l'), but Netcraft is only interested in those with web-servers.
  55. Re:How to fix it? by glwtta · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I don't get it. Why would Gentoo's security need to be improved? I can only remember two Gentoo compromises (though I'm sure there have been more), this one and a long time ago there was an exploit introduced into the build script for a package, this was caught (also within the hour) by the MD5 hash check that emerge does.

    Two compromises, both cought within an hour and with no (absolutely none) adverse effects on the users - there is just not much room for improvement here, this is what good security is.

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
  56. That does it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    First it was Debian, now it's gentoo.
    I'm switching to my own home brewed OS
    You vulnerable Linux people don't deserve my support

    Asta la vista, I won't be back!

  57. Re:The only reason this is news... by fastidious+edward · · Score: 2

    "...not a big deal..." because only 20 people used the server in an hour.

    but there is the possibility it could have happened to a server with much more throughput. That is worrying. Dismissing this as not a big deal is a slack attitude to security, be it a part-time server or not.

    --

    karma karma karma karma karma chameleon, you come and go, you come and go.
  58. Re:Question from non-hacker by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Informative

    There are several methods with which you can gain access.

    1. Buffer overflows, or out of bounds issues, with services running on a server, eg ftpd, httpd, sendmail, bind (dns). This is where it is discovered to be possible to send malformed data to a service which the service is not expecting and wont deal with naturally. This sometimes results in the ability to send it some executable code which is read straight into memory and executed. Very easy to code around, very easy to detect, fairly easy to detect and very easy to exploit. This is the sort of attack that normally occurs against MS Windows et al, although sendmail, bind and various ftpds (wu-ftpd) have a reputation for being full of them.

    2. Password sniffing. This is where someone sits between a user and their box and sniffs network traffic, etiher getting a password unencrypted (normal ftp login, pop3 etc etc) or a weak hashed. Fairly easy to do, and you have a login to the system when you do. Not normally seen these days as ssh is used, and you should always have a seperate restricted user login for other services which do not encrypt passwords (imap, pop3, ftp etc).

    3. Issues with web scripts, that sometimes allow you to insert data into a database which the owner doesnt want you to do (or get a copy of his database) via SQL Injection attacks. Also it has been fairly common in the past to be able to get a copy of /etc/passwd by passing certain variables to a script run on a webserver, and from there you can attack user accounts. Also certain scripts have the error of allowing you to run system binaries, which again can be exploited. Always run your database daemon and your httpd in a chroot environment, with minimal access to system binaries, and always as a non privileged user.

    The biggest problem these days is that a lot of services run as root, because they need to to bind to ports lower than 1024. This was done so it allows you to "trust" services on those ports as being proper ones, rather than ones run by a normal user. A way around this is to run all services as a standard user, on port ranges above 1024 and bound only to IP 127.0.0.1. This means that your services are no longer on the standard ports, but you can get around this by using ipfilter, pf or another port fordwarding tool to forward all traffic on external priviledged ports to the services on 127.0.0.1, allowing you to run services as non priviledged users while retaining compatability with the outside world.

    It is VERY difficult to secure a server to near 100% levels, although you can get pretty close if you want to constantly be working at it. The goalposts change rapidly from day to day, and it can be hard to keep up. If you only run the services you really need, in chroot environments, and ensure that those services are well known services (apache for httpd, exim postfix or qmail for smtpd, pure-ftpd or pro-ftpd for ftpd, DJBDNS or bind 9 for dns) then you can be assured that there are trusted people looking at the source for exploits to fix as well as the untrusted people doing the same to exploit.

    Good logging firewall rulesets, an IDS (intrusion detection system), and a remote logging facility are all plusses in the fight.

  59. Here's what real security looks like by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cars are built out of steel, not glass. Glass is a very strong material. But hit it with a hammer and it shatters. Steel just gets dented.

    Gentoo had "ductile" security. They were able to limit the damage because they had some kind of Tripwire/mtree-like program running on the inside. Given the speed of the response, my guess is that they had a response plan ready to go.

    The lesson is that measures to limit the damage from a break are as vital as measures to prevent breaks in the first place. Fire prevention doesn't substitute for sprinkler systems, and intrusion prevention doesn't substitute for backups. You've got to have both.

  60. Re:The only reason this is news... by AVee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Really? How does a windows machine being compromised effect me?

    Ever looked at the amount of incomming traffic when you're online? Ever considered where the amount of you are getting is mainly comming from?
    Unless they get windows.update, I am not concerned at all.

    Well, start worring right now. How big do you consider the chance that your vendor tells you about that? They don't even tell you about problem in your OS they know about for months before some exploit is published in the wild.

    I do share your concern about trusting the source of your software, but even with these compromises i'd trust Debian and Gentoo more that a big company that has a huge interest in hiding problems like that.
    There is no solution to this problem, other then writing all your software yourself. The thing that comes the closed to that, while being still practical, is and open development model where a lot of people are reviewing the source for mistakes and/or malware.

  61. Tripwire / AIDE by Asdex · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From the Gentoo Altert:
    • "However, the compromised system had both an IDS and a file integrity checker installed"

    Gentoo realized that they got hacked after one day.
    GNU Savannah realized that they got hacked after one month.

    It's time to propagate the use of file integrity checkers! They can detect the effects of any new exploit and can't be circumvented (when properly used!).


    AIDE
    Tripwire
  62. I'm going to get trolled for this... by reconbot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But I'm glad that there has been so many attacks against linux and other oss projects.

    Kernel.org, debian.org, gentoo.org Gnu.org All of them had security holes and now those holes are plugged.

    I used to run a few servers. Mostly web-servers, but I had a few for mail and other things. Almost every single one was hacked all in the same 2 month period. I had kept up with updates and I figured I was secure. If I wasn't hacked I would have never known that I wasn't secure and I could have been seriously screwed down the line. It was a much needed eye opener.

    --
    I'm just this guy, you know?
  63. More good news then bad by neopara · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Security is so much more then stopping the user at the door. There are always going to be 0-day exploits, which have no patches. The trick with security is mitigating your exposure. Getting root is not a successful hack, keeping it is. So what if someone rooted my box, if I can see it; I can deal with it. These latest big-profile comprises are actually good news because the attacks where not successful. It shows how well Linux can mitigate exposer, and how it layers it security. This is where Microsoft goes wrong with it's lastest methodology towards security. They think putting a firewall in place is all that you need, which is absolutely wrong.

    --
    Nothing more, For me to say; About my life, A life of dreams....
  64. rsync security update by boots@work · · Score: 2, Informative
    An rsync vulnerability has been identified.

    I was going to post it here, but the moronic lameness filter won't let me. So you'll need to look at rsync.samba.org.

    The rsync team has received evidence that a vulnerability in rsync was recently used in combination with a Linux kernel vulnerability to compromise the security of a public rsync server. While the forensic evidence we have is incomplete, we have pieced together the most likely way that this attack was conducted and we are releasing this advisory as a result of our investigations to date.[....]