|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Jeffrey GoldbergJeffrey Goldberg Date: Oct 4, 2007 11:02
[I've removed comp.sys.mac.comm from followups. I believe that the
c.s.m.* charters frown on cross-posting.]
In news.east.cox.net>, Michelle Steiner wrote:
> Rootkit software covers the tracks of the attackers and can be extremely
> difficult to detect. According to Cullinane, none of the Linux operators
> whose machines had been compromised were even aware they¹d been infected.
> Although Linux has long been considered more secure than Windows, many
> of the programs that run on top of Linux have known security
> vulnerabilities, and if an attacker were to exploit an unpatched bug on
> a misconfigured system, he could seize control of the machine.
Note that if you are running your Mac as a server directly connected to
the Internet you are probably running much of the same server software as
on a Linux machine.
> Because Linux is highly reliable and a great platform for running server
> software, Linux machines are desired by phishers, who set up fake Web
> sites, hoping to lure victims into disclosing their passwords.
Again, this would apply to OS X equally well.
|
| Show full article (2.19Kb) |
|
| | 8 Comments |
|
|
Author: Jeffrey GoldbergJeffrey Goldberg Date: Oct 4, 2007 14:56
In news.east.cox.net>, Michelle Steiner wrote:
> Jeffrey Goldberg goldmark.org> wrote:
>>
> You didn't.
Oops. Sometimes I wish that mailers would check for "is attached" in the
text and give the sender a warning if they try to send such a message
without an attachment. This is similar.
>> I believe that the c.s.m.* charters frown on cross-posting.]
>
> They don't.
My apologies.
>> But in terms of underlying characteristics of the OS in these
>> respects, Linux and OS X are in the same boat.
>
> They're not.
Michelle,
|
| Show full article (1.54Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Jolly RogerJolly Roger Date: Oct 4, 2007 15:28
On 2007-10-04 16:56:54 -0500, Jeffrey Goldberg goldmark.org> said:
> It's my understanding that the security flaws that get exploited in
> Linux servers are in programs like apache, IMAP servers, SMTP servers,
> DNS servers, SQL servers and so on. You will find that OS X is often
> running the same software for these services as on Linux machines.
Yep. Macs running such services have indeed been made part of botnets
as a result in recent history.
--
Note: Please let me know if you send email to this address so that I can
be sure your email doesn't get eaten by pobox.com's ultra-aggressive
SPAM filter.
Help improve Usenet:
* Learn proper Usenet etiquette:
http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html
* Kill-file Google Groups:
http://improve-usenet.org/
JR
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Oct 4, 2007 15:33
Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
> If you are denying this or stating that other things about OS X make
> those vulnerabilities less of an issue than on Linux, I'd like to hear
> what you have in mind.
It may be minor, but one typical difference is the
"disabled" root account.
--
Wes Groleau
"A man with an experience is never
at the mercy of a man with an argument."
-- Ron Allen
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Jolly RogerJolly Roger Date: Oct 4, 2007 15:44
On 2007-10-04 17:33:38 -0500, Wes Groleau freeshell.org> said:
> Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
>> If you are denying this or stating that other things about OS X make
>> those vulnerabilities less of an issue than on Linux, I'd like to hear
>> what you have in mind.
>
> It may be minor, but one typical difference is the "disabled" root account.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Tom HarringtonTom Harrington Date: Oct 4, 2007 15:59
In article <2007100417284175249-jollyroger@poboxcom>,
Jolly Roger pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2007-10-04 16:56:54 -0500, Jeffrey Goldberg goldmark.org> said:
> >> It's my understanding that the security flaws that get exploited in
>> Linux servers are in programs like apache, IMAP servers, SMTP servers,
>> DNS servers, SQL servers and so on. You will find that OS X is often
>> running the same software for these services as on Linux machines.
>
> Yep. Macs running such services have indeed been made part of botnets
> as a result in recent history.
Although Macs run many of the same servers as Linux, I had not heard of
them becoming part of botnets. Where did you hear about this?
|
| Show full article (1.36Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Oct 4, 2007 16:02
Tom Harrington wrote:
> Mac versions of the botnet program. Even if security were breached, a
> Linux botnet tool won't run on a Mac.
But if security is breached, a Java, perl, or PHP program
can do a heck of a lot, portably.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Jolly RogerJolly Roger Date: Oct 4, 2007 16:23
On 2007-10-04 17:59:25 -0500, Tom Harrington
pcisys.no.spam.dammit.net> said:
> In article <2007100417284175249-jollyroger@poboxcom>,
> Jolly Roger pobox.com> wrote:
> >> On 2007-10-04 16:56:54 -0500, Jeffrey Goldberg goldmark.org> said:
>> >>> It's my understanding that the security flaws that get exploited in
>>> Linux servers are in programs like apache, IMAP servers, SMTP servers,
>>> DNS servers, SQL servers and so on. You will find that OS X is often
>>> running the same software for these services as on Linux machines.
>>
>> Yep. Macs running such services have indeed been made part of botnets
>> as a result in recent history.
>
> Although Macs run many of the same servers as Linux, I had not heard of
> them becoming part of botnets. Where did you hear about this?
|
| Show full article (2.32Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Warren OatesWarren Oates Date: Oct 4, 2007 17:48
In article <6TdNi.6122$n92.5631@trnddc06>,
Wes Groleau freeshell.org> wrote:
> It may be minor, but one typical difference is the
> "disabled" root account.
It's not totally "disabled" though:
Last login: Thu Oct 4 10:31:15 on ttyp1
Welcome to Darwin!
[~]$ sudo su
Password:
machine:/Users/warren root#
Works the same in Darwin as it does in Slackware. Nothing up my sleeve,
I haven't enabled the root account, it's just there.
--
W. Oates
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
