RE: [logs] hack attempts && price

From: Steve Wray (steve.wrayat_private)
Date: Wed Feb 20 2002 - 15:38:55 PST

  • Next message: H C: "RE: [logs] hack attempts && price"

    > From: H C [mailto:keydet89at_private]
    > Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2002 3:37 a.m.
    > To: Steve Wray; Russell Fulton; Lubomir.Nistor@star-21.de
    > Cc: loganalysisat_private
    > Subject: RE: [logs] hack attempts && price
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > > I think it all boils down to this; our cultural
    > > association
    > > with this sort of technology is only just beginning.
    > > Everything is essentially having to be learned from
    > > scratch
    > > by everyone who gets into it even just a little bit.
    > 
    > I don't know.  I would agree that this is the case for
    > things like recent/current MCSE's, but Unix admins had
    > this all down pat years ago.  Of course, 'zero
    > knowledge administration breeds zero knowledge
    > administrators'; re: NTFS alternate data streams, etc.
    
    Sure, but what I'm trying to get at is the level of social
    pressure on sysadmins. In the case of the callout I got,
    the general manager there is now much more aware of these
    issues and knows what to ask her sysadmins etc. She will
    doubtless pass this sort of thing on to her friends and
    so the body of cultural knowledge will grow.
    Sysadmins will frequently only do what they are *asked* to
    do, or are required to do (particularly the case, I feel,
    for 'certified' technicians who typically follow procedures,
    and when those procedures don't help for the specific
    situation things can fall apart).
    
     
    > I teach a 2-day, hands-on incident response course for
    > NT/2K.  I've had folks ask be during the course, "why
    > would someone want to break into my computer??"
    
    And, briefly, what do you tell them?
    
     
    > > Its going to take a while before these manners of
    > > thinking
    > > have gotten into the popular culture enough to do
    > > any good.
    > 
    > I agree, but I don't see why.  As a security
    > consultant, I have been reporting this to clients for
    > years.  When I was a security manager, I tried to get
    > folks to change their manner of thinking sooner rather
    > than later.
    
    Its a cultural thing. I think that its something that
    has to seep into our body of common knowledge, as things
    to do with other technologies have seeped in.
    Who, today, would wear a jockstrap packed with radium?
    Not so long ago, this was a 'patent medicine'.
    :)
    Nowadays, after quite some time, our cultural awareness
    of the hazards of radiation have improved. The same will
    happen WRT computer 'stuff'
    
    
    [snip]
    > > I got a callout from a company that had been hacked
    > > and their internet access taken down for two
    > > business days. Because their 'official' admins hadn't been checking
    > > logs. Or hadn't been aware of what they were seeing.
    > 
    > Which takes us back to the original issue...how can
    > you put a price tag on security, or compute ROI, in a
    > situation like that?  What was the 'hack' (you didn't
    > mention the company name, which was good...thought I'd
    > ask what happened)?  Did it require two days of
    > downtime?  Could it have been prevented?  In the
    > aftermath, was there anything useful in the logs?
    
    Ok well, when I checked it, it (Linux box) was booting
    but barely and nothing would run (complaining about missing
    libc 5)
    I booted it from a rescue disk and checked the logs.
    over the previous 10 days it had been used as a launchpad
    by a group of (apparently) Romanian hackers.
    They had started trying to hack in (via an old sshd)
    about another 10 days before that.
    The logs were full of sshd complaining about people trying
    to connect as root from .ro domains, and eventually there
    was a successful one. From then on they installed rootkits
    and hacking tools to the bliss of their savage little hearts,
    and tried to hack into other sites.
    Eventually, it seems, one of them tried to install some kit
    that hides root kits, only it was compiled for libc 5, and
    the system didn't have the libraries. Thats when it fell
    over and I was called in (because the site is in NZ and
    their admins are in AU).
    
    From my perspective, it shouldn't have been down for two days,
    but my role was purely diagnostic and I had no control over
    the process of rebuilding the system.
     
    I told the general manager that their admins had absolutely NO
    excuse for letting things get that far; the log entries
    were very clear. I think they got a rocket up them.
    8)
    
    It could easily have been prevented by maintaining an up-to-date
    sshd. This was a well known exploit that even script kiddies
    could have (and did, judging by the contents of .bash_history
    (no they didn't clear it; it was full of erroneous commandlines
    such that I'm fairly certain that they didn't *really* know
    their way around Unix)).
    
    
    > > Their general manager was absolutely distraught. 
    > > They *sure* became aware of how hacking can impact
    > > ones 
    > > business life, and she now has a nice horror story
    > > to 
    > > tell as well. Word gets about, people learn. It
    > > takes time tho.
    > 
    > Unfortunately, in situations like this, *most* folks
    > demonize the 'hacker', rather than address the real
    > issue...which is, what was so wrong with our processes
    > that this happened?  If any changes are made, just
    > wait 6 months...complacency will set in again.  
    
    Yes, thats why I made sure that the manager was aware
    of what had happened and why it shouldn't have been
    allowed to happen in the first place.
    
    
    
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    To unsubscribe, e-mail: loganalysis-unsubscribeat_private
    For additional commands, e-mail: loganalysis-helpat_private
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Feb 20 2002 - 17:16:09 PST