Hakeri oborili server sa Ubuntu Linux-om!

[psy_unix]

Alo ljudi pa nemojte tako . Ako iko mrzi windozu i konkretno UBUNTU (imam ga kuci i na poslu) onda sam to ja . ALI : 
Ako se pravilno i precizno konfigurise server ne moze se oboriti ni win 95 . Uvek je kriv ljudski faktor tj admin , veruj te mi .  O0 O0 O0

[foxbunny]

Ma znamo da imaju lose admine, Ono gore je bila samo fora. :biggrin:

[miodragz]

Najverovatnije nisu instalirali SP2

[LYb]

ko se pravilno i precizno konfigurise server ne moze se oboriti ni win 95 .

Ne slazem se sa ovime. Imao sam prilike da se uverim kako je win2003 podlozan. Polise su mu neupotrebljive 🙂

Mene vise zabrinjava ideja da stavis ubuntu ili bilo koji distro tog tipa, koji vise naginje hobistima i desktopu, na produkcinone servere.

[dukenukem_4d]

postoje linuxi i linuxi ,ovo vec verovatno svi znaju ,ali ajde
stavite trustix secure linux – pa posle nek upadaju ako mogu
http://www.trustix.org/
http://www.trustix.org/content/category/2/3/15/

mala napomena : na njemu se teze vrti kocka,jer uglavnom nema x-server
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=trustix

[BrokeBody]

znamo da imaju lose admine

Argumenti?

Uostalom, to nisu Cnonical-ovi serveri. Canonical je samo sponzorisao tih 5 servera, jer pripadaju nekim LoCo timovima, a ko zna ko je to drzao.

Ama jel’ citao neko vest uopste?

[dukenukem_4d]

evo procitao sam:

due to problems with the network card and later kernels

znaci na novom kernelu nije radio driver za neki tip mreznih kartica
pa nisu vrsili update zbog toga.

[BrokeBody]

How did this happen
——————-

Unfortunately:

  a) the servers, especially zambezi were running an incredible
      amount of web software (over 15 packages[1] that we recognised)
and
      of all the ones where it’s trivial to determine a version, they
      were without exception out-of-date and missing security patches.
      An attacker could have gotten a shell through almost any of
      these sites.

  b) FTP (not sftp, without SSL) was being used to access the
      machines, so an attacker (in the right place) could also have
      gotten access by sniffing the clear-text passwords.

  c) The servers have not been upgraded past breezy due to problems
      with the network card and later kernels.  This probably allowed
      the attacker to gain root.

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/loco-contacts/2007-August/001510.html

[LYb]

a)
An attacker could have gotten a shell through almost any of these sites.
— Njima ne treba dati da cuvaju ni nacrtanu ovcu, a ne server u produkciji.

b)
— Super, dozvolis plaintext login na masinama. Osim toga, sta im znaci ono “hacker in the right place”? Kako je stigao na “right place”? Pomocu servisa pod “a”?

c)
— Kernel im nije kriv za njihovu nesposobnost. Osim toga, ako im je BAS stalo da imaju novi kernel, zasto ne promenise mreznu kartu?

Lep primer kako ne treba raditi.
Sve u svemu, lepo su me nasmejali 🙂

[BrokeBody]

Njima ne treba dati da cuvaju ni nacrtanu ovcu, a ne server u produkciji.

Kome tacno?

[Аутор]

Чланци