RE: [cobalt-security] URGENT Hacking

[Gossi The Dog <gossi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Chris Weiss wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> 
> [Snipped]
> 
> It would be nice if Cobalt hadn't removed ipchains from their
> distribution, as this would aid greatly in blocking things like this.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> You can install ipchains very easily.  I have on my machines.  You can also
> download and install the 2.2.14c11 kernel from Cobalt and compile it with
> whatever options you want or need (you should remove some of the default
> crap and other options).

<snip>

Where from?

Also, are there any issues to watch out for?

And finally (this is beginning to sound like a Q&A session), have you
tried moving a Cobalt up to a non-specific Cobalt kernel manually (eg
2.2.18 or 2.4.0-testX or whatever).

This are all things that'd very much like to try, but at the same time
don't want to shaft our Cobalt.

Cheers for any answers here...
 
> On another note.... all of your objections to my original post were correct.
> It is hard not to write a dissertation on security.  When you get into the
> special case of writing trojans and using buffer overflow exploits, the
> whole idea of protecting access on a service level goes out the window.  Any
> general rule you write will have exceptions.

Well, I agree.  I admit I went into rant mode (again) a bit...

> I disagree with the statement that Linux security is crap because you make
> it sound like Linux is especially easy to hack.  I believe all operating
> systems have crappy security out of the box.  I have yet to work with a
> platform or an OS that was simply turn on the box and sleep easy.  My NT box
> before I put it behind my firewall had been hacked multiple times in spite
> of implementing every patch and trick I could find.  Without a proxy or a
> firewall, NT is very vulnerable.  At least Linux can be hardened without an
> intervening box.

Heh, I've never made the statement that NT is secure :))  I still consider
things like the automatic locking of accounts as 'basic security',
however.