"fooler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Kid Pogi wrote:
>
>> "fooler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Fritz Mesedilla wrote:
>> >
>> >> Greetings!
>> >>
>> >> I hope someone can help me. I wish to know how to configure a SECURE REMOTE
>> >> LOGGING host.
>> >>
>> >> I'm currently using Red Hat LInux 7.0 and Apache 1.3.19. Please advice on
>> >> what things are needed and what i have to do.
>> >>
>> >
>> >the most important thing on your syslog server is your log files. its up to you 
>how you protect your log files even if
>> >your syslog server is being compromise.
>>
>> Nope.  If your log server is compromised (rooted), game over ka na.  No amount of 
>"log files protection" will help you.  The best approach, AFAIK, is to _prevent_ your 
>loghost from being compromised.  Easier said than done, I know.
>
>are you sure about that kid pogi? i didnt say what specific OS to use...

Yup, I'm sure.  You didn't mention a specific OS but the original poster did.  Red Hat 
Linux 7.0.  Suggestions which would be unimplementable on that OS would be pretty much 
useless to him, right?

> did you tried openbsd or freebsd *SECURELEVEL* feature? even the *ROOT* 

No, I haven't tried *BSD.  I've been looking for installation CDs for it, but so far 
no luck.  Do you have any suggestions?

> cannot delete nor modify the files if you change the file flags into SCHG
> or SAPPND only.  let me cut and paste what the man page tells about the
> securelevel:

Not sure for a BSD system but on a Linux system, if root can set the immutable or 
append only flags, he can, _necessarily_, _unset_ it.

<snipped, probably OT and not applicable to a _loghost_>

> take note that even the ip firewall cannot be modify aside from file if
> your securelevel is 3. take note also the word IMMUTABLE and APPEND ONLY.

Your point being?

> linux has a third party to patch and supports what freebsd or openbsd
> feature had but everytime there is a new kernel you have to wait from
> them to release their new patch unlike freebsd or openbsd, its already
> integrated in their kernel.
>
> as i said, its depends how you protect your log files. there are lots of
> ways to protect your logs files even if your syslog server is being
> compromise and its OS has no features what freebsd or openbsd had. one
> of the best way to approach is to implement WORM (write once read many).
> one of the example for worm which your logs will be recorded is the CD-R,
> printer, etc. but this is too expensive to implement and you notice that i
> used freebsd and not linux to secure my syslog server simply because thats
> the cheapest way to do it.

Protecting the log files and protecting the _printout_ or _copy_ of the log files are 
totally different matters to my understanding.  If you were referring to both as being 
the same, then this discussion is probably pointless.

> is it game over?

Why do I have this feeling that it's not?


Regards,
abramos



__________________________________
www.edsamail.com
_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
          • ... JMG
          • ... Fritz Mesedilla
          • ... Ambrosio Berdijo Jr.
            • ... Fritz Mesedilla
            • ... fooler
        • ... Brian Baquiran
  • ... Kid Pogi
  • ... Kid Pogi
  • ... Kid Pogi
  • ... Kid Pogi
  • ... Win ------------------------------------------------------------>>> GO

Reply via email to