From: Jesse Pollard <pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>
To: mhw@wittsend.com, J Sloan <joe@tmsusa.com>
Cc: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@aracnet.com>,
Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>,
Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>,
"Holzrichter, Bruce" <bruce.holzrichter@monster.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: please kindly get back to me
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 16:49:56 -0500 (CDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200206042149.QAA93039@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil> (raw)
"Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@wittsend.com>:
...
>
> It's not theoretical and it's not just in the labs. It's real
> and it's in the wild now. It just doesn't have the population
> density and the monclonal culture to make it go BANG like the Windows
> worms go. Yet...
>
...
So which do you think is better:
1. buy/write/update virus software to catch/trap the virus
2. Fix the security hole.
I put my money on #2.
There are several ways to trap attacks on daemons that have such
vulnerabilities. And using virus scanners CANNOT keep up.
The obvious solution is:
1. Use one of the high security patches (SELinux or RSBAC) and use
compartmentalization to keep the problem under control.
2. Use the detected problem to locate and fix the security problem in
the daemon.
Virus scanners cannot keep up. The virus that does the damage is the one
the scanner doesn't recognize. This is equivalent to the bug that wasn't
fixed.
Generation and propagation of a patch is nearly as fast if not faster
than generating another virus signature; and is a LOT more effective.
The high security patches allow the system to continue functioning even
in the presence of the virus, as long as the virus itself is compartmented.
At one time, there was some discription of the Ramen/lion worm attempting
to attack a SELinux based system.. and failed. It did get in the daemon,
but was then isolated from the rest of the system.
I do believe that the kernel can be improved - not including daemon services
in the kernel itself is one (tux?,nfs?,... yes they work faster, but is it
worth the security risk?).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesse I Pollard, II
Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil
Any opinions expressed are solely my own.
next reply other threads:[~2002-06-04 21:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-04 21:49 Jesse Pollard [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-06-04 4:26 please kindly get back to me Hank Leininger
2002-06-04 2:04 Matt_Domsch
2002-06-04 3:17 ` J Sloan
2002-06-03 15:46 JOSEPH EDWARD.
2002-06-03 15:33 Holzrichter, Bruce
2002-06-03 19:00 ` Matti Aarnio
2002-06-03 19:06 ` Larry McVoy
2002-06-03 19:23 ` Matti Aarnio
2002-06-03 19:43 ` stoffel
2002-06-04 0:37 ` Alan Cox
2002-06-04 7:10 ` Rik van Riel
2002-06-04 8:11 ` J Sloan
2002-06-03 19:50 ` H. Peter Anvin
2002-06-03 20:16 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-06-03 20:03 ` M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
2002-06-03 20:08 ` Gerhard Mack
2002-06-03 23:11 ` J Sloan
2002-06-04 0:20 ` Austin Gonyou
2002-06-04 20:25 ` Michael H. Warfield
2002-06-03 20:54 ` Rik van Riel
2002-06-03 20:58 ` Herman Oosthuysen
2002-06-03 22:51 ` J Sloan
2002-06-04 14:25 ` Pavel Machek
2002-06-03 15:26 JOSEPH EDWARD.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200206042149.QAA93039@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil \
--to=pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil \
--cc=bruce.holzrichter@monster.com \
--cc=joe@tmsusa.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=matti.aarnio@zmailer.org \
--cc=mhw@wittsend.com \
--cc=znmeb@aracnet.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox