LinuxQuestions.org
View the Most Wanted LQ Wiki articles.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Security
User Name
Password
Linux - Security This forum is for all security related questions.
Questions, tips, system compromises, firewalls, etc. are all included here.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 04-18-2008, 10:03 AM   #1
keysorsoze
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Queens, NY
Distribution: Red Hat, Solaris
Posts: 295

Rep: Reputation: 30
SELinux and Apache Treason Uncloaked error!


Hi! I was wondering if someone could give me some insight on if setting up Apache within SELinux would stop all the treason uncloaked attempts on my server. Would SELinux essentially jail/sandbox the Apache process so that anything that accesses the daemon can't break out of it? If so wouldn't this not essentially deny all the Treason uncloaked attempts since they are not in the httpd_t context?

Ex:

TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 6.6.6.37:38/80 shrinks window 2718851748:2718853128. Repaired.


Thanks
 
Old 04-18-2008, 10:49 AM   #2
jschiwal
Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Fargo, ND
Distribution: SuSE AMD64
Posts: 15,733

Rep: Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655
I had to look up what that meant:
http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-L.../msg03750.html
 
Old 04-18-2008, 10:40 PM   #3
keysorsoze
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Queens, NY
Distribution: Red Hat, Solaris
Posts: 295

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Thanks jschiwal, this is a strange bug, the only web servers that we see these errors on are the ones facing the Internet. We have two web servers facing the web for redundancy and they both are seeing the same "Treason Uncloaked" errors. All of our internal web servers do not have these errors. Which lead me to the thought of it being a breach/denial of service attempt.
 
Old 04-18-2008, 11:08 PM   #4
jschiwal
Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Fargo, ND
Distribution: SuSE AMD64
Posts: 15,733

Rep: Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655
It may be a type of denial of service attack or an attempt to crash the server. I guess the gist of it is that the client reduces the size of the window against protocol. Is this coming from a single IP or a number of them? You could blacklist that IP if it is.
 
Old 04-18-2008, 11:11 PM   #5
keysorsoze
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Queens, NY
Distribution: Red Hat, Solaris
Posts: 295

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
The attacks come from several IP's I just listed one for an example. I'll look into scripting out a IPTables rule to ban these IP's. Perhaps a daily/hourly scan of the /var/log/dmesg file for any "Treason Uncloaked" attempts and deny those IP addresses.
 
Old 04-18-2008, 11:22 PM   #6
jschiwal
Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Fargo, ND
Distribution: SuSE AMD64
Posts: 15,733

Rep: Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655
You might consider subscribing to the kernel mailing list. From your message it looks like the kernel is doing something to protect itself, but I'm not certain. The links I found were a couple years old. There may be more work done in this area as well.

This more recent link indicates that the problem (for that user) wasn't with an attacker at all:
http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-L.../msg04353.html
Check if your kernel precedes the patch. If your kernel is more recent then you probably need to assume it is a dos attack.

Last edited by jschiwal; 04-18-2008 at 11:35 PM.
 
Old 04-19-2008, 05:16 AM   #7
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,699
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962
We've had this question before (and you should search LQ keysorsoze, because you've asked this before as well) and quite some time ago, proof this has been in the kernel for a long time. The message (of the informational level) is proof of the robustness of the Linux kernel: it determined there was a problem, corrected it automagically, all by itself. Refs:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...tempts-572874/
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ssages-526332/
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...loaked-112531/
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...loaked-127984/
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TCP: Treason uncloaked! basbosco Linux - Networking 4 03-04-2008 12:24 PM
SELINUX or ls -Z..no control of Apache mikeghet Suse/Novell 0 10-28-2005 01:57 AM
Apache and selinux azrael808 Linux - Software 1 02-10-2005 01:41 PM
TCP: Treason uncloaked! basbosco Linux - Security 2 11-11-2004 11:40 AM
TCP: Treason uncloaked! acid2000 Linux - Networking 3 10-14-2003 12:07 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:16 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration