Linux - Security This forum is for all security related questions.
Questions, tips, system compromises, firewalls, etc. are all included here. |
| Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
 |
GNU/Linux Basic Guide
This 255-page guide will provide you with the keys to understand the philosophy of free software, teach you how to use and handle it, and give you the tools required to move easily in the world of GNU/Linux. Many users and administrators will be taking their first steps with this GNU/Linux Basic guide and it will show you how to approach and solve the problems you encounter.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free. |
|
 |
11-12-2004, 03:54 PM
|
#1
|
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 2
Rep:
|
Is '/usr/bin/find' reliable if '/bin/ls' has been replaced?
I have a system running RH9 which appears to have been compromised. I believe /bin/ls has been replaced with a "customized" version to confound attempts at inspecting the system. I am using /usr/bin/find (which appears to have been left alone) in order to identify all files which have changed since the time of the compromise (I don't think the intruder was clever enough to hide the footprints he left in the modifcation times of the files). My concern is that, if find relies upon ls, its output may also be unreliable.
Thanks for your help!
|
|
|
|
11-12-2004, 05:41 PM
|
#2
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: May 2004
Location: In the DC 'burbs
Distribution: Arch, Scientific Linux, Debian, Ubuntu
Posts: 3,816
Rep: 
|
I'm pretty sure that find just calls the stat system call directly, without interpreting ls results. However, if you suspect binaries have been replaced, you really ought to boot of known good media such as a rescue CD and then run a rootkit detector.
|
|
|
|
11-12-2004, 10:42 PM
|
#3
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Mar 2003
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 3,658
Rep:
|
You can try using rpm -Va to verify the integrity of system files (assuming that the md5sum and rpm binaries haven't been replaced either). Probably the best way to verify is to use a cdrom-based distro like knoppix and mount the potentially compromised drive read-only. Then calculate md5sums and compare to the "normal" versions. If your system has been compromised, then you will need to reformat the drive and re-install completely (don't reinstall from a backup). Simply replacing trojaned versions isn't a safe way to recover from a security compromise.
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:23 AM.
|
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|