An unusual report from Portsentry this evening: May 14 21:00:34 raq portsentry[572]: attackalert: SYN/Normal scan from host: boron.eu.sun.com/1$ May 14 21:00:34 raq portsentry[572]: attackalert: Host 192.18.1.5 has been blocked via wrappers$ May 14 21:00:34 raq portsentry[572]: attackalert: Host 192.18.1.5 has been blocked via dropped $ May 14 21:00:35 raq kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 192.18.1.5:63474 x.x.x.x:$ May 14 21:00:36 raq kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 192.18.1.5:63478 x.x.x.x:$ May 14 21:00:38 raq kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 192.18.1.5:63474 x.x.x.x:$ May 14 21:00:39 raq kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 192.18.1.5:63478 x.x.x.x:$ May 14 21:00:45 raq kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 192.18.1.5:63474 x.x.x.x:$ May 14 21:00:45 raq kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 192.18.1.5:63478 x.x.x.x:$ May 14 21:00:50 raq 4 kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 192.18.1.5:63595 x.x.x.x:$ and so on.... Is there a valid reason why we would be seeing this activity from Sun Microsystems? Lawrence ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Irwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 2:30 PM Subject: Re: [cobalt-security] PortSentry/Active System Attacks > Chris Burton wrote: > > > > Hi, > > If it was one of your customers then a reinstall do anything to help, try > > and find out if it was a customer that did it. If you dont have customers > > (or other users) then look at the state of the RAQ has it been compromised > > or not ? > > > > ChrisB. > > > > Actually a better idea is to find out who did the scan. If you really > want to be the strict admin, run a locate for various scripts that users > may use in linux to run port scans. A good way to find out what those > scripts may be is to visit www.antionline.com or www.securityfocus.com > and make a list of the commonly used scripts for port scanning. Run > "locate <scriptname>" and see if it lists anything. If you get a hit, > make a note of the users acct. You can then go into their .bash_history > file and find out if they did run commands for port scans. > then: > > 1) warn them they are in violation of Terms Of Service (you did make a > TOS for your customers didn't you?). > 2) if they don't listen or initiate another scan with a 24 to 72 hour > period, dump them as they are a big liability to your company and not > worth the potential trouble no matter how much they may be paying. > 3) review whether your customers need access to telnet or ssh, if no, > then cut off all access. > > This may seem like a heavy handed approach by some people. However, when > you look at the liability implications and possible trouble that may be > caused by this person, it doesn't seem all that bad. > > <This opinions are strictly my own and do not constitute the opinions or > positions of my employer> > > -- > Bill Irwin > Technical Support Engineer > Sun Microsystems, Inc. > _______________________________________________ > cobalt-security mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-security _______________________________________________ cobalt-security mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-security
Re: [cobalt-security] PortSentry/Active System Attacks
Lawrence Frewin of Accommodation.com Mon, 14 May 2001 13:32:59 -0700
- [cobalt-security] PortSentry/Active S... Glen Scott
- Re: [cobalt-security] PortSentry... Bill Irwin
- Re: [cobalt-security] PortSentry... Michael Stauber
- Re: [cobalt-security] PortSentry... Damian Gerow
- Re: [cobalt-security] PortSentry... Michael Stauber
- Re: [cobalt-security] PortSentry... Dave
- RE: [cobalt-security] PortSentry... William Lessard
- RE: [cobalt-security] PortSentry... Chris Burton
- Re: [cobalt-security] PortSentry... Bill Irwin
- Re: [cobalt-security] PortSentry... Lawrence Frewin of Accommodation.com
- Re: [cobalt-security] PortSe... Kevin D
