This only seems to affect Red Hat based systems.
I think that somehow the attacker has been able to alter some RPM
package(s) on some mirror(s).
These packages later got installed on servers as updates infecting
those systems.

I think this is also the reason I wasn't aware of this thing yet, it
is a distro specific security flaw.

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Pavol Cupka <[email protected]> wrote:
> this is from the infected server
>
> root@server1 [/var/log]# stat /lib/libkeyutils.so.1.9
>   File: `/lib/libkeyutils.so.1.9'
>   Size: 26904           Blocks: 56         IO Block: 4096   regular file
> Device: 6ah/106d        Inode: 357728408   Links: 1
> Access: (0755/-rwxr-xr-x)  Uid: (    0/    root)   Gid: (    0/    root)
> Access: 2013-02-18 07:28:21.000000000 -0500
> Modify: 2007-01-06 02:57:38.000000000 -0500
> Change: 2013-02-18 07:28:06.000000000 -0500
>
> the file libkeyutils.so* are part of the sys-apps/keyutils package the file
> is slightly smaller
>
> stat /lib/libkeyutils.so.1.4
>   File: ‘/lib/libkeyutils.so.1.4’
>   Size: 9560            Blocks: 24         IO Block: 4096   regular file
> Device: 801h/2049d      Inode: 33101       Links: 1
> Access: (0755/-rwxr-xr-x)  Uid: (    0/    root)   Gid: (    0/    root)
> Access: 2013-03-22 12:19:56.674851171 +0100
> Modify: 2012-12-02 23:16:09.000000000 +0100
> Change: 2013-02-19 02:01:18.301392129 +0100
>  Birth: -
>
> you can also check the files using the
>
> equery k keyutils
>
> command, or using the sabayons build-in check in equo (I don't know the name
> of it as I don't use sabayon anymore)
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Andre Jaenisch
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> 2013/3/22 Joost Ruis <[email protected]>:
>> > I checked my system here ( amd64 ) and it seems we are not affected by
>> > this.
>> >
>> > On this page you can find some tests you can perform.
>> > http://docs.cpanel.net/twiki/bin/view/AllDocumentation/CompSystem
>>
>> Can you attend it to http://bugs.sabayon.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4108 ?
>> The thread is broken somehow ...
>>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to