Yea. I'm really on the fence here, I've already burned an evening
scrubbing it (used ClamAV, chkrootkit, and rkhunter off of a live CD),
moved SSH ports, updated credit, bank, and gmail passwords. ClamAV
grabbed the latest signature (as soon as I found an ethernet card the
live CD had a driver for). 

Fortunately my bank is not email centric. If I can't auth to the website
I gotta either call and chat to someone or go in and chat with someone.
When I do talk to people I get real people who are able to communicate
clearly. Credit card issuer is the same except for the "communicate
clearly" part, sometimes the accents get a bit thick to resolve issues
quickly.

Gmail has been updated as well. 

At this point I think I'm clear. Thanks for the advice and tips, for
those of you who advised a rebuild: If I get my identity stolen or lose
money or access to an accont over this, I grant you the right to say "I
told you so" and rub my nose in it a little.

One last tip, the pwgen utility kicks ass! Reasonably secure passwords
that aren't impossible to remember. 

On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 22:14 -0400, Rob Ludwick wrote:
> The paranoid guy in me would just rebuild it.  A rootkit detector only
> uncovers rootkits it knows about.   If you're a halfway decent C coder,
> you can roll your own rootkit with a moderate amount of trouble. 
> 
> I also forgot something, if changing your banking password requires an
> email sent to your, say, gmail account, then you should change that too
> -- preferably from a bootable cdrom (like the ubuntu CD).  If they get
> into the email account, there's a trust relationship between it and the
> banking web site they can use.  They change the password at your banking
> site, and then open up your email and click through the confirmation.
> 
> --R
> 
> On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 12:23 -0400, Vern Ceder wrote:
> > Then very definitely be sure you have the rootkit angle covered.
> > 
> > A mac would have a /var/log/sytem.log and secure.log - haven't looked at 
> > them much, but they might tell you what's going on. There may even be a 
> > GUI log viewer in the control panel, I'm not sure. And that's ONLY if 
> > you have ssh and samba turned on for that machine.
> > 
> > Vern
> > 
> > Jonathan Bartels wrote:
> > > Damn it.
> > > 
> > > Given a choice I would prefer to take the longer, slightly riskier route 
> > > of repairing rather than reinstalling.
> > > 
> > > The only other machines on the network are my wifes Mac (how can I 
> > > review logins on that?) and my throwaway laptop (will be rebuilt).
> > > 
> > > What I'm expecting is that from the postgres account the user would have 
> > > full access to anything running on postgres as well as whatever read 
> > > access a normal user would have. The only "sensitive" operations I do on 
> > > that machine are online banking, so I'll generate some new passwords at 
> > > work and wipe out my keepass file at home.
> > > 
> > > On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Rob Ludwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> > > 
> > >     Yeah I agree and run the root kit detector from a bootable cdrom or 
> > > usb
> > >     key, using a known linux kernel that has not been corrupted.
> > > 
> > >     There are rootkits that hide the existence of themselves by loading a
> > >     special kernel module that prevents root from seeing certain files,
> > >     processes, and other things necessary to detect their presence.
> > > 
> > >     --R
> > > 
> > >     On Sun, 2008-08-03 at 22:09 -0400, Vern Ceder wrote:
> > >      > Don't forget to check for a rootkit, or to be even safer, just
> > >     resintall
> > >      > the OS from scratch and the data from a back up.
> > >      >
> > >      > There is a chkrootkit and a rkhunter, I believe, that will check 
> > > for
> > >      > rootkits.
> > >      >
> > >      > Vern
> > >      >
> > >      > Rob Ludwick wrote:
> > >      > > Jon,
> > >      > >
> > >      > > 92.55.82.121 <http://92.55.82.121> is listed in Dshield.org
> > >     database, as an attacker 3 times.
> > >      > > Possibly from Macedonia.
> > >      > >
> > >      > > 62.162.164.116 <http://62.162.164.116> is in a block assigned
> > >     to Macedonia, it appears 0 times
> > >      > > in the Dshield.org database.
> > >      > >
> > >      > > Considering that both came from Macedonia, one with a hit on
> > >     Dshield, I
> > >      > > would say that yes.  It's safe to assume you've been hacked.
> > >      > >
> > >      > > If you've noticed, there may have been a lot of activity on
> > >     port 22,
> > >      > > with a lot of rejections on the same IP within maybe within a
> > >     span of 30
> > >      > > minutes.  Then there's another IP address that scans the next
> > >     day with
> > >      > > another set of usernames and passwords.  That's been pretty
> > >     standard for
> > >      > > about 2 or 3 years now.
> > >      > >
> > >      > > So I would figure out if they had any access to boxes on that
> > >     network as
> > >      > > well.  Putting nologin in /etc/passwd is good, but they may
> > >     have been
> > >      > > going on for a while, and that may not be their only avenue of
> > >     entry.
> > >      > >
> > >      > > And when you determine the list of boxes they had entered on your
> > >      > > network, reformat them and put a fresh install of software on.
> > >      > >
> > >      > > And if you did any banking with those boxes, it would be wise
> > >     to change
> > >      > > account passwords.  As well as any other account you consider
> > >      > > confidential that you accessed from those machines.
> > >      > >
> > >      > > --R
> > >      > >
> > >      > > On Sun, 2008-08-03 at 11:20 -0400, Jon wrote:
> > >      > >> In the last few weeks I poked a hole through my router to SSH
> > >     into my
> > >      > >> box at home from the road.
> > >      > >>
> > >      > >> I was just scrounging thru the auth.log with `grep 'Accepted
> > >     password
> > >      > >> for' ./auth.log* | less`
> > >      > >>
> > >      > >> And got this:
> > >      > >>
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 28 12:03:39 nichtscheissen sshd[24906]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 216.155.176.39 <http://216.155.176.39>
> > >     port 5873 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 28 13:04:40 nichtscheissen sshd[25857]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 216.155.176.39 <http://216.155.176.39>
> > >     port 4689 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 28 21:41:34 nichtscheissen sshd[1839]: Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 192.168.1.104 <http://192.168.1.104>
> > >     port 40752 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 28 21:43:27 nichtscheissen sshd[2138]: Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 192.168.1.104 <http://192.168.1.104>
> > >     port 40755 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 28 21:44:07 nichtscheissen sshd[2155]: Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 192.168.1.104 <http://192.168.1.104>
> > >     port 40757 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 28 22:01:27 nichtscheissen sshd[2440]: Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 192.168.1.104 <http://192.168.1.104>
> > >     port 43941 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 28 22:01:50 nichtscheissen sshd[2452]: Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 192.168.1.104 <http://192.168.1.104>
> > >     port 43942 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 28 22:09:36 nichtscheissen sshd[2726]: Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 192.168.1.104 <http://192.168.1.104>
> > >     port 46126 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 29 21:17:35 nichtscheissen sshd[18658]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 192.168.1.104 <http://192.168.1.104>
> > >     port 42032 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 31 08:34:03 nichtscheissen sshd[26223]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 216.155.176.39 <http://216.155.176.39>
> > >     port 21045 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 31 08:34:09 nichtscheissen sshd[26227]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 216.155.176.39 <http://216.155.176.39>
> > >     port 21283 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 31 08:38:42 nichtscheissen sshd[26243]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 216.155.176.39 <http://216.155.176.39>
> > >     port 20307 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 31 08:39:21 nichtscheissen sshd[26257]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 216.155.176.39 <http://216.155.176.39>
> > >     port 20229 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 31 08:39:44 nichtscheissen sshd[26262]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for jon from 216.155.176.39 <http://216.155.176.39>
> > >     port 17171 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Jul 31 18:13:22 nichtscheissen sshd[6258]: Accepted
> > >      > >> password for postgres from  port 63075 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Aug  1 03:20:35 nichtscheissen sshd[11115]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for postgres from 62.162.164.116
> > >     <http://62.162.164.116> port 1283 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Aug  1 03:31:04 nichtscheissen sshd[11368]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for postgres from 62.162.164.116
> > >     <http://62.162.164.116> port 1685 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Aug  1 11:04:02 nichtscheissen sshd[18404]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for postgres from 62.162.164.116
> > >     <http://62.162.164.116> port 3262 ssh2
> > >      > >> ./auth.log.0:Aug  1 13:41:06 nichtscheissen sshd[20845]: 
> > > Accepted
> > >      > >> password for postgres from 92.55.82.121 <http://92.55.82.121>
> > >     port 64237 ssh2
> > >      > >>
> > >      > >> The logins for me from the 216 address are kosher. Thats me
> > >     from work.
> > >      > >>
> > >      > >> Its the logins for postgres that concern me.
> > >      > >>
> > >      > >> What I've done so far is changed the postgres users shell
> > >      > >> to /usr/sbin/nologin.
> > >      > >>
> > >      > >> Any ideas whats going on here? How concerned should I be about
> > >     these
> > >      > >> successful logins?
> > >      > >>
> > >      > >
> > >      > >
> > >      > > _______________________________________________
> > >      > > Fwlug mailing list
> > >      > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> > >      > > http://fortwaynelug.org/mailman/listinfo/fwlug_fortwaynelug.org
> > >      >
> > > 
> > > 
> > >     _______________________________________________
> > >     Fwlug mailing list
> > >     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> > >     http://fortwaynelug.org/mailman/listinfo/fwlug_fortwaynelug.org
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > -----
> > > Jonathan Bartels
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Fwlug mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://fortwaynelug.org/mailman/listinfo/fwlug_fortwaynelug.org
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Fwlug mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://fortwaynelug.org/mailman/listinfo/fwlug_fortwaynelug.org


_______________________________________________
Fwlug mailing list
[email protected]
http://fortwaynelug.org/mailman/listinfo/fwlug_fortwaynelug.org

Reply via email to