Hello dr. Wagner

Thanks for your answers.
I apologize but I need more clarifications about your questions and comments.
Later on my answers and doubts according your sequence:
1- Yes, I enabled dependencies at runtime.

2- About your second question, I meant the scanner was running as normal user.
   But your question made me doubtful: I never worried about users on the 
target machine both for scanning without LSC enabled, when I do not need an 
user (I believed), and using LSC, for which on purpose I created user sshovas 
without password. Is it all correct?

3- I do not have an user named openvas on the system (I remember you that I am 
doing tests using the client/server host as target too!), but errors about 
authentication for openvas user started only after a specific date. It looks 
like I made some kind of activity which changed something on Openvas 
configuration. The stranger aspect is that, for me, OpenVAS seems work well 
both client and server side!

4- I did not understand at all your last comment:
   This observation is OK.
The actual LSCs only do checks on the KB without connecting a target system.
Its the other scripts that do active connection to the target system and 
retrieve package dabase etc.

Especially when you say that LSCs do not connect to the target system but check 
the KB. For which reason I built the publickey authentication? And do I need to 
enable the KB feature to activate LSCs?

Thank you again.

My kindest regards

Francesco










 
 
--------------------------------------------------------

This e-mail and any attachments is a confidential correspondence intended only 
for use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended 
recipient or the agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution or copying 
of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the error at the following email address: 
[email protected] or at Aspasiel Helpdesk Team by phone (phone number 
+390744203555), and then delete this message from your system.
P Please consider our environment and think before you print. Thank you! q

--------------------------------------------------------

 

Da: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] Per conto di 
[email protected]
Inviato: venerdì 9 aprile 2010 17.57
A: [email protected]
Oggetto: Openvas-discuss Digest, Vol 39, Issue 10

Send Openvas-discuss mailing list submissions to
        [email protected]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://lists.wald.intevation.org/mailman/listinfo/openvas-discuss
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        [email protected]

You can reach the person managing the list at
        [email protected]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Openvas-discuss digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. About LSC (Vincenti Francesco)
   2. Re: About LSC (Jan-Oliver Wagner)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 16:16:37 +0200
From: "Vincenti Francesco" <[email protected]>
Subject: [Openvas-discuss] About LSC
To: <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
        <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello everybody

 

I started to test my OpenVAS tool (2.x.x), installed on a Fedora C7 OS,
and I tried to activate the Local Security Checks to analyze the
features it offers.

To do this I activated a public/private key connection, according the
suggestions of the documentation. I followed all the steps in the same
way.

 

I built a scope with  Fedora Local Security Checks plugins and others
activated, to analyze localhost (the host where server and client are
installed).

I put the data suggested by documentation under "Credentials" section
and I started the scope not as root but as a normal user.

The output was a report which contains the following information:

Security Issue and Fixes - Host localhost

 

Localhost - ssh (22/tcp)

 

Informational

 

An ssh server is running on this port

OID: something

 

Informational

 

It was possible to login using the SSH credentials supplied.

Hence local security checks are enabled

OID: something

 

Informational

 

Remote SSH version: version

 

Remote SSH  supported authentication: publickey, gssapi-with-mic,
password

 

After these, few information about the Operating system OpenVAS found.

 

So, I thought the SSH publickey connection worked well!

 

But, when I analyzed /var/log/secure, I found the following message:

 

Apr  9 11:00:06 hostname sshd[8518]: Did not receive identification
string from 127.0.0.1

Apr  9 11:00:09 hostname sshd[8529]: Accepted publickey for sshovas from
127.0.0.1 port 11262 ssh2

Apr  9 11:00:09 hostname sshd[8529]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session
opened for user sshovas by (uid=0)

Apr  9 11:00:12 hostname sshd[8570]: Invalid user openvas from 127.0.0.1

Apr  9 11:00:12 hostname sshd[8573]: input_userauth_request: invalid
user openvas

Apr  9 11:00:12 hostname sshd[8570]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): check pass;
user unknown

Apr  9 11:00:13 hostname sshd[8570]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication
failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh rus

er= rhost=localhost.localdomain 

Apr  9 11:00:13 hostname sshd[8570]: pam_succeed_if(sshd:auth): error
retrieving information about user openvas

Apr  9 11:00:15 hostname sshd[8570]: Failed password for invalid user
openvas from 127.0.0.1 port 11264 ssh2

Apr  9 11:00:15 hostname sshd[8573]: Connection closed by 127.0.0.1

Apr  9 11:13:51 hostname sshd[8529]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session
closed for user sshovas

 

And lastlog does not show sshovas connected.

 

Is there anyone who can explain what happened and the meaning of these
incongruous results?

I do not think to miss something but all is possible.

 

Thank you very much.

 

Best regards

 

Francesco Vincenti

 

 

P.S.

After other tests, i verified that the error sequence regarding user
openvas in /var/log/secure appears also without executing Local Security
Checks plugins.

 


 
 
--------------------------------------------------------

This e-mail and any attachments is a confidential correspondence intended only 
for use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended 
recipient or the agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution or copying 
of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the error at the following email address: 
[email protected] or at Aspasiel Helpdesk Team by phone (phone number 
+390744203555), and then delete this message from your system.
P Please consider our environment and think before you print. Thank you! q
--------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://lists.wald.intevation.org/pipermail/openvas-discuss/attachments/20100409/2cedbb7a/attachment-0001.htm

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:56:19 +0200
From: "Jan-Oliver Wagner" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Openvas-discuss] About LSC
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="utf-8"

Hello Francesco,

On Friday 09 April 2010 16:16:37 Vincenti Francesco wrote:
> I started to test my OpenVAS tool (2.x.x), installed on a Fedora C7 OS,
> and I tried to activate the Local Security Checks to analyze the
> features it offers.

I recommend to switch to OpenVAS 3.0 in general.
However, the LSCs should work for both 2.0 and 3.0.
 
> I built a scope with Fedora Local Security Checks plugins and others
> activated, to analyze localhost (the host where server and client are
> installed).

Have you enable dependencies at runtime?

> I put the data suggested by documentation under "Credentials" section
> and I started the scope not as root but as a normal user.

You mean the scanner is running as normal user?
Or do you mean the remote user on the target system?
However, LSCs sould work nicely even via less privileged users.

> So, I thought the SSH publickey connection worked well!

yes, looks OK.
 
> But, when I analyzed /var/log/secure, I found the following message:
> 
>  
> 
> Apr  9 11:00:06 hostname sshd[8518]: Did not receive identification
> string from 127.0.0.1
> 
> Apr  9 11:00:09 hostname sshd[8529]: Accepted publickey for sshovas from
> 127.0.0.1 port 11262 ssh2
> 
> Apr  9 11:00:09 hostname sshd[8529]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session
> opened for user sshovas by (uid=0)
> 
> Apr  9 11:00:12 hostname sshd[8570]: Invalid user openvas from 127.0.0.1
> 
> Apr  9 11:00:12 hostname sshd[8573]: input_userauth_request: invalid
> user openvas

Can you check you did not mix users "sshovas" and "openvas" in some way?
 
> After other tests, i verified that the error sequence regarding user
> openvas in /var/log/secure appears also without executing Local Security
> Checks plugins.

This observation is OK.
The actual LSCs only do checks on the KB without connecting a target system.
Its the other scripts that do active connection to the target system and 
retrieve
package dabase etc.

All the best

        Jan

-- 
Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner |  ++49-541-335084-0  |  http://www.greenbone.net/
Greenbone Networks GmbH, Neuer Graben 17, 49074 Osnabr?ck
AG Osnabr?ck, HR B 202460 | Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Lukas Grunwald, Dr. Jan-Oliver 
Wagner


------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Openvas-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wald.intevation.org/mailman/listinfo/openvas-discuss


End of Openvas-discuss Digest, Vol 39, Issue 10
***********************************************
_______________________________________________
Openvas-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wald.intevation.org/mailman/listinfo/openvas-discuss

Reply via email to