From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757066Ab1JAUaO (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Oct 2011 16:30:14 -0400 Received: from nm28-vm0.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com ([98.138.91.22]:40638 "HELO nm28-vm0.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756094Ab1JAUaH (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Oct 2011 16:30:07 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 319 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:30:07 EDT X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 534577.94492.bm@smtp108.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: KsyJeK4VM1nBVBpYU5Bq.5fYIznlRBpJX_03HkBpvSNZUDb 1Nn6Q.siF3E8RoWOF74YouY21leFFiSzcCbgtU2UWKMzei1ug9qzMoajEeF5 1NhlPeSpyOdSiCE6iLk0okTFRklYKvN2Vu6HOAh3ub.wxQHTR9EdBaFSLgHd Cbk_w8Q0E4et61pKJPzLA8_FVYBlCY1EoW6C5_WNmTYEojeLhifrnyE7nvYC 3oljKqpYwDYpmJ01V1yziKmdwN8HEyekvz7SbNSuUBhPrHrYl.yn6hV5OZnC ZlQ7wCVQedcKRnbRAAoqasRHd36GsN8aeRTY.0s0t1eG_8O0Yteg0cMSAxG1 2ahqGruPxXb9xLi6NEkvUEpC6LL2Bl8LMwUmyDkNB0LtRf_dYv_X65g.gWid 0OwdeIUFdVSH2ZMkSwu86AikGfmCfnvtthEKijq379BrlD6AaqXA- X-Yahoo-SMTP: gvIQca6swBCF5pMq54eC.XuJ8SoqXA5fBgqzSmaH Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 15:24:40 -0500 From: Andy To: Willy Tarreau Cc: schwab@linux-m68k.org, Greg KH , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: kernel.org status: hints on how to check your machine for intrusion Message-ID: <20111001202440.GA14673@zeus> References: <4E8655CD.90107@zytor.com> <20110930235924.GA25176@kroah.com> <20111001141751.GA8937@zeus> <20111001142848.GA27058@kroah.com> <20111001165659.GB18690@1wt.eu> <20111001171916.GA11989@zeus> <20111001175456.GC18690@1wt.eu> <20111001184044.GA13608@zeus> <20111001190612.GA14779@1wt.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111001190612.GA14779@1wt.eu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 01, 2011 at 09:06:12PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > OK I'm attaching two files, one computed with the initial 002 perms and > a second one with the new 022 perms. I don't precisely know when the perms > changed, hence the two files. I noticed that 2.6.25 was still 002, and that > 2.6.32 was 022. In between I don't know. Note that I'm missing some tags > (at least 2.6.35.12 and a few 2.6.33.x and 2.6.34.x). Very helpful Willy, many thanks for doing this. > It would be nice if someone with an access to a mirror could check the > perms of *every* tarball so that we can establish the definitive list > of signatures. I agree, would be nice to fill in the few gaps. ~ Andy