so, we have boxes (many) with 2 UID 0 accounts. most compliance checks that
look for root ownership report back that the file is owned by the second UID
0 account. For instance
 6.4 Verify /etc/shadow File Permissions : [FAILED]\n\nFile :
/etc/shadow\nRemote value: owner: mymyroot group: root mode: 0400 attr:
------------- \nPolicy value: owner: root group: root mode: 0400 \n\n
when in fact it's owned by UID 0. here's some other interesting nuances to
that

[10:43 AM - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~] getent passwd root
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash

[10:43 AM - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~] getent passwd myroot
myroot:x:0:0:My Root:/myroot:/bin/csh

[10:43 AM - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~] getent passwd 0
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash

[10:43 AM - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~] ls -al /etc/shadow
-r--------  1 root root 1097 Jun  2 03:04 /etc/shadow

[10:45 AM - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~] cat /etc/passwd | grep ":0:"
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
myroot:x:0:0:My Root:/myroot:/bin/csh


So, the second UID 0 account is after root in the passwd file. getent
returns the right value, listing the root account. Also, my own test using a
sudo account shows that it's doing an ls -lnd on /etc/passwd, and that even
reports back uid 0. So, i'm guessing that the compliance check is taking the
last entry. This is causing a false positive
-- 
Doug Nordwall
Unix, Network, and Security Administrator
You mean the vision is subject to low subscription rates?!!? - Scott Stone,
on MMORPGs
_______________________________________________
Nessus mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/nessus

Reply via email to