[Rkhunter-users] broken link in cvs readme for skdet?

Hi I am using Opera 9.21 browser at the moment. CVS readme version 1.15 has this link http://slider.decebal.org/code/skdet/ I can not get this or the domain to work. ps a quick google for skdet and download fails for me altho the obligatory porn links show up. cheerio Send instant messages

[Rkhunter-users] request the wiki to be at sourceforge site

hi team This suggests the wiki can now be at your site https://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=705841 Altho I was not previously excited to run 2 wikis I have changed as: 1) Voting for 2007 link is at your site and the 2006 result shows clamav getting 2 prizes...g heh hehyes I

[Rkhunter-users] John Horne.... Thanks and ......wiki for cvs edition almost complete

Hi 1) Thanks John for the previous help on unhide, its now working beautifully. 2) If any subscriber has the time, the cvs edition of the wiki is almost complete. http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/CVS-rkh If you are able to join and edit I would love it as its hard for me to check my own

[Rkhunter-users] why do we have CVS...os.dat and defaulthashes.dat files?

Hi team Maybe I am gettin more confused but ...what the heck I might as well ask away. Why do we have the os.dat file in the cvs edition? I thought your team was moving away from this style of having data files based somewhat on the inference that users verify their own internal files.

[Rkhunter-users] re vol14 digest 3 followup to rpm manager and new concern with hashes using beta edition

John Thankyou for previous reply. I am using the beta edition for these tests and rootkits are still not found. I am still not expecting a quick reply and thankyou for your patience but.. 1) Question (1) Why do I need to run this command rkhunter -c -sk --pkgmgr? Information In my

Re: [Rkhunter-users] Vol 15, Issue 2.... different distro support

Hi Pedro Pinto I refer to your request for Zenwalk distro support question/suggestion. John suggests distros may have missing certain etc files. But I can remember another reason why your suggestion may not always work. When I was playing with Mepis...it reported under RKH that it was a

[Rkhunter-users] suggestion for conf file in beta2

Hi 1) When I did the edits to my conf file for hidden dir and files I get a new and improved feedback, which is greatly appreciated. I like that the detection still occurs and is reported. eg [09:07:59] Info: Found hidden directory '/etc/.java': it is whitelisted. 2) UnSpawn has already

Re: [Rkhunter-users] Rkhunter-users Digest, Vol 16, Issue 3

John Thanks for quick reply. It is my fault that I have not attempted to learn programming, but I was given an open licence to test, as everyone is. So forgive me for mis-reading the code I was alluding to. TIA. Yes I agree that the un-install would cause big problems if the user chose /usr

[Rkhunter-users] feedback for Dick - unhide stops box

my end. My apols in advance to John for ignoring his suggestion. FYI gordy Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now. www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail - This SF.net email

[Rkhunter-users] How to check that ....deleted files check....results are not false positives?

Hi How to confirm deleted files are false positive? I did a default un-install and default install of 1.3.2. ran --update then a scan then --propupd then -c -sk scan.Am running all tests and none disabled [15:15:32] Info: Starting test name 'deleted_files' [15:15:32] Checking running

[Rkhunter-users] My followup to question How to know if deleted files are false positives

copy which I auto ignored for all 3 PIDs. cat /home/gordy/Documents/2884/task/2884/cwd/proc/2884/fd/4 Starting system message bus:[ OK ] --- [09:15:48] Process: /usr

[Rkhunter-users] request gpg feedback for those that have the time and experience

Please scroll down if you do not have the time or expertise to verify this issue thankyou. I have permission from unSpawn to raise one question about the gpg key for the tarball. I am not an expert in this area. For those who have already validated the tarball could one of you verify this

[Rkhunter-users] RKH is rated 4th highest open source app

http://www.esecurityplanet.com/article.php/11162_3741146_1 Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address. www.yahoo7.com.au/y7mail - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM)

Re: [Rkhunter-users] Scanning for hidden files

Martin Please check the files are legit first using your file manager and as Mich says if ok whitelist them. We are starting to get a wiki together so the relevant page is here http://rkhunter.wiki.sourceforge.net/MPC good hunting cheerio 2008/7/15 Mix Tux [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Martin

[Rkhunter-users] low priority ..possible gpg issue?

Hi mailing list Happy 2009 and thanks for a new version, I have been on cvs 1.3.3 1) I have always struggled with gpg...so first the forestI can install rkh okits just I have trouble getting gpg to work. here are my attempts # gpg --list-packets rkhunter-1.3.4.tar.gz.asc :signature

Re: [Rkhunter-users] low priority ..possible gpg issue?

Hi ok...thanks for those tips...I have now found gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 26447505 gpg: requesting key 26447505 from hkp server subkeys.pgp.net gpg: key A65F5E17: public key rkhun...@hushmail.com rkhun...@hushmail.com imported gpg: 3 marginal(s) needed, 1 complete(s) needed,

Re: [Rkhunter-users] low priority ..possible gpg issue?

--fingerprint /home/gordy/.gnupg/pubring.gpg -- pub 1024R/A65F5E17 2007-07-22 Key fingerprint = E15B CD4D 6F14 E91D 1DD5 31A9 EA5F 4CD3 A65F 5E17 uid rkhun...@hushmail.com rkhun...@hushmail.com sub 2048R/26447505 2007-07-22 4) while mine shows up

Re: [Rkhunter-users] RKH Hangs when running all tests?

longer than running it as a background process. I suggest you try your way if its above...but then run it as a cron job and I think you will find it will be a lot faster. good luck gordy -- This SF.net email is sponsored

[Rkhunter-users] possible glitch in 1.3.6 for checks of Xzibit kit

Hi I am on a Debian derivative called sidux which is not a server recommened product as its sid based. But Strange result for version tarball 1.3.6 .Xzibit 1) Rootkit checks... Rootkits checked : 243 Possible rootkits: 2 Rootkit names: Xzibit Rootkit, Xzibit Rootkit 2) In

Re: [Rkhunter-users] Possible false positive on /etc/init.d/hdparm

Hi your warning found was Found string 'hdparm' in file '/etc/init.d/hdparm'. Possible rootkit: Xzibit Rootkit This was discussed in the mailing list but I have also added it to the wiki http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/rkhunter/wiki/MPMOD Under section Modify for your own watch list and

[Rkhunter-users] cvs dated 20100221....is good...FYI ...no complaints

Hi Just did a full scan using cvs dated 20100221 on a Debian system and no complaints. There is no need to view log or conf but if interested they can be found here. http://stashbox.org/u/aus9 2) Let me know if you want me to run any specific test. regards gordyaka aus9

Re: [Rkhunter-users] Re RKH permissions

a better life. Altho I am an Australian and should be unfazed by swearing.please consider making any reply to me..without swearing...it may get a better response. Thanks if you can help. regards gordy

Re: [Rkhunter-users] Burning rkhunter.dat to a CD and linking to file gives error

Hi Conrad might not mean the conf but the wiki? section Download tarball in http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/rkhunter/wiki/SPRKH where I attempt to explain the clean install needs no net to use the tarball. On 22 August 2010 07:30, Conrad Schuler limited.addr...@gmail.com wrote: In the

Re: [Rkhunter-users] hdparm

On 21/09/2010, Richard Spencer spencer.richar...@gmail.com wrote: hi is this a false postive /etc/init.d/hdparm it appeared twice i did the full--propupd HI It may be, I recently did a a clean install then ran RKH and saw hdparm mentioned for 2 files in the etc area but not

Re: [Rkhunter-users] Rkhunter-users Digest, Vol 52, Issue 4

hi re boonana I don't use a mac and the mention of linux appears to be very unspecific as seen here in quote Another security vendor has verified that the Boonana malware is capable of infecting Linux machines, and will proceed to join a botnet once installed. The malware also affects Mac OS X