2.0.29 security

2.0.29 security

Post by Dustin Sander » Mon, 26 May 1997 04:00:00



How secure is Linux v2.0.29? What did the patches after that fix.
Thanks
Dustin Sanders, Information Systems Manager
Pulsar Corp.

 
 
 

2.0.29 security

Post by Albert D. Cahal » Tue, 27 May 1997 04:00:00



> How secure is Linux v2.0.29? What did the patches after that fix.

I think 2.0.30 lets you enable enable protection against
a denial-of-service attack. (the SYN attack) You need some
other adjustments to take advantage of that.

Mostly though, any holes will be found _outside_ the kernel
in your daemons and suid programs. Example: sendmail.
Check with your vendor (Red Hat, Debian, Slackware...)
for issues that affect you.
--
--
Albert Cahalan <acahalan at cs.uml.edu> My address may be mangled to
avoid junk email. Please check it if you wish to respond to a news post.

 
 
 

2.0.29 security

Post by Eric Sche » Tue, 27 May 1997 04:00:00




>> How secure is Linux v2.0.29? What did the patches after that fix.

>I think 2.0.30 lets you enable enable protection against
>a denial-of-service attack. (the SYN attack) You need some
>other adjustments to take advantage of that.

A small correction. Yes, 2.0.30 includes protoction against SYN flooding.

However, it is NOT necessary to make any changes to user land
programs to take advantage of the protection. There was an
earlier kernel patch that required you to enlarge the backlog
queues to take advantage of the fix. This fix was a random
drop fix. The solution in 2.0.30 is a crytographic cookie approach
that requires no information to be stored on the machine
under attack, and requires no changes to the size of the
backlog queues on the machine under attack.

--
Eric Schenk                               www: http://www.dna.lth.se/~erics

Box 118, S-221 00 LUND, Sweden   fax: +46-46 13 10 21  ph: +46-46 222 96 38

 
 
 

1. symbols from kernel 2.0.29 don't match 2.0.29?!?!?

I just upgraded my linux 1.2.13 to 2.0.29 using upgrade in a box...
everything seemed to compile fine, however all of my loadable modules are
giving me the error:
Failed to load module! The symbols from kernel 2.0.29 don't match 2.0.29
This is becoming a little more than a nuisance.
I boot from loadlin using the zImage that I compiled with the modules,
and I load the modules using insmod (I've tried from both the command
line, and from my rc files) I have tried loading them with a kernel with
CONFIG_MODVERSIONS on and again with it set off, and I still keep getting
the same error.
Any suggestions?

2. Executable not found newbie question (Oracle/Linux)

3. 2.0.29 modules cannot be loaded by 2.0.29 kernel??????

4. how to use grep or other command to find a string between beginning and end

5. Computer Security Symposium, Dallas, TX, Oct 27-29, 1997

6. NAT configuration question

7. One Week Course on Internet Security, July 29-August 2, at Stanford

8. can i help??

9. The Black Hat Briefings Security Conference final announcement - July 29-30th

10. Linux Security Week - January 29th 2001

11. (fwd) Security bug: BSD login.c version "5.73 (Berkeley) 6/29/91"

12. Security bug: BSD login.c version "5.73 (Berkeley) 6/29/91"

13. Security Vulnerability (HPSBX9602-029) in syslog