Have I been cracked or am I just clueless?

Have I been cracked or am I just clueless?

Post by marvin greenber » Mon, 02 Oct 2000 04:00:00



I was trying to tune my system a little, and had learned that I
wanted to put my swap partition near the front of the disk.
So I did swapoff, converted my existing swap (hda6) to a e2fs,
and copied all of my exisiting root (hda2) to it.  Then I changed
fstab to point to hda6 and rebooted.  The strange part came
when I did a df. It still reported the same size as before, although
hda6 was larger.  What I've determined to be going on is that
hda2 still is being mounted as /.  See the df below:

Filesystem           1k-blocks      Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda6                77772     75458         0 100% /
/dev/hda3                62193     41408     17574  70% /home
/dev/hda7              1249132    779232    406448  66% /usr
/dev/hdc5               101089        33     95837   0% /tmp
/dev/hdc3               256665     18740    224672   8% /var
/dev/hda6               139986     40003     92756  30% /tmp/mnt

fsck still seems to know the difference between hda2 and hda6, since fsck -n reports
valid stuff.  But this df (where I manually mounted hda6 (again!?)) looks very suspicious.

I only have slow dial-up IP.  I find it a little hard to believe I've been
cracked. I've been slowly getting ready for a DSL like, to be installed
"real soon now". I set up my linux box with rh6.2, installed the 2.2.16
kernel and set up ipchains using the guidance from http://www.linux-firewall-tools.com.
I have been running tripwire from the start, but only against a database
on a writable  partition (but I have a copy of the original databases).

I am running samba 2.0.6, bind 8.2.2_P5-9 (and have
concluded I probably shouldn't be), and have practically everything
shutdown in inetd.conf.

My next step is to reinstall tripwire, and check the system against the original
database.  But I'm reluctant to reinstall unless I can be sure this isn't just
paranoia.

 
 
 

Have I been cracked or am I just clueless?

Post by Joe Schaefe » Mon, 02 Oct 2000 04:00:00



> I was trying to tune my system a little, and had learned that I
> wanted to put my swap partition near the front of the disk.
> So I did swapoff, converted my existing swap (hda6) to a e2fs,
> and copied all of my exisiting root (hda2) to it.  Then I changed
> fstab to point to hda6 and rebooted.  The strange part came
> when I did a df. It still reported the same size as before, although
> hda6 was larger.  What I've determined to be going on is that
> hda2 still is being mounted as /.  See the df below:

[...]

Did you edit /etc/lilo.conf and run /sbin/lilo after you changed /etc/fstab?
What does

% grep root /etc/lilo.conf

say?

--
Joe Schaefer

 
 
 

Have I been cracked or am I just clueless?

Post by marvin greenber » Mon, 02 Oct 2000 04:00:00


Thanks.  I'm clueless (which I suspected.)


> > I was trying to tune my system a little, and had learned that I
> > wanted to put my swap partition near the front of the disk.
> > So I did swapoff, converted my existing swap (hda6) to a e2fs,
> > and copied all of my exisiting root (hda2) to it.  Then I changed
> > fstab to point to hda6 and rebooted.  The strange part came
> > when I did a df. It still reported the same size as before, although
> > hda6 was larger.  What I've determined to be going on is that
> > hda2 still is being mounted as /.  See the df below:

> [...]

> Did you edit /etc/lilo.conf and run /sbin/lilo after you changed /etc/fstab?
> What does

> % grep root /etc/lilo.conf

> say?

> --
> Joe Schaefer

 
 
 

1. bug in thr_keycreate ? or am I clueless ?

Hi there. I've been working with the solaris thread package and I'm having
some problems with the thr_keycreate function call. This function is used
to create thread specific data. The arguments are a pointer to a  thread_key_t
variable where the created key will be stored and a pointer to a destrucutor
function call. It seems however that thr_keycreate only works properly if
the  thread_key_t is initialized to 0. If it's not then no key will
be created but the function call will not return any error. There is
(to my knowledge) no reference to this kind of beahviour in the manuals, so
is this a bug a feature or am I missing something here ?

The progam below ilustrates what I mean.

The output is :

   Error x1: 22 (EINVAL = 22)
   Error x2: 22 (EINVAL = 22)

and the compile line is :

   cc -g -D _REENTRANT create_thread.c -lthread

I know that  thread_key_t are supposed to be globals and in that case
we can count on them be initialized to 0 ( can we ?) but what if
we want to allocate memory to the key at run time ? do we have to
iniatialize it ?

Thanks for reading

#include <thread.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <errno.h>

main ()
{  

  int ret;
  int data1 = 12345678;
  int data2 = 22345678;
  int data3 = 32345678;
  int data4 = 42345678;

  thread_key_t k1 = 0 , k2 = 0;
  thread_key_t x1 = -1 , x2 = -11;

  ret = thr_keycreate (&k1, NULL);
  ret = thr_setspecific (k1,&data1);
  if (ret != 0)
    printf ("Error k1: %d (EINVAL = %d)\n", ret, EINVAL);

  ret = thr_keycreate (&k2, NULL);
  ret = thr_setspecific (k2,&data2);
  if (ret != 0)
    printf ("Error k2: %d (EINVAL = %d)\n", ret, EINVAL);

  ret = thr_keycreate (&x1, NULL);
  ret = thr_setspecific (x1,&data3);
  if (ret != 0)
    printf ("Error x1: %d (EINVAL = %d)\n", ret, EINVAL);

  ret = thr_keycreate (&x2, NULL);
  ret = thr_setspecific (x2,&data4);
  if (ret != 0)
    printf ("Error x2: %d (EINVAL = %d)\n", ret, EINVAL);

2. Help istalling midi driver

3. This clone thing...am I stupid, or am I right?

4. How do you debug the lp subsystem

5. [TRIVIAL] USB Joypad quirk

6. I am with the following error, when i am running lilo...

7. tar -C option?

8. Am I touchy? Or am I right?

9. Am I seeing IPv5, or am I hallucinating?

10. I am buying an Ultra 5 but am lost in part numbers ....

11. I am in text mode, what browser am I running....

12. I am si**y am I?