Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Linux - Indicators of compromise


From: Scott Solmonson <scosol () scosol org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:20:54 -0700

Shortcutting other responses-

A suspect node that you want to keep live can only be treated in two ways:

1) if you need to know who is behind the shenanigans, you monitor net
traffic and isolate/simulate reach and then do what you can to get
what you need.

2) assume the worst, don't isolate, monitor spread tactics,
perceptually contain and then analyse.

Live on-box analysis is useless in every case, and you need to think forensics.
Disconnect, dump, analyse- but only after you've got what you really need.

Endgame is always close the hole, restore the data, learn from your
mistakes that allowed it to happen :)

--
NUNQUAM NON PARATUS ☤ INCITATUS ÆTERNUS


On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 5:46 AM, Ali Varshovi <ali.varshovi () hotmail com> wrote:
Greetings FD,

Does anyone have any guidelines/useful material on analysis logs of a Linux machine to detect signs of compromise? 
The data collection piece is not a challenge as a lot of useful information can be captured using commands and some 
scripts. I'm wondering if there is any systematic approach to analyze the collected logs? Most of the materials I've 
seen are more aligned to malware and rootkit detection which is not the only concern apparently.

Thanks,
Ali
.
---------------------------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry device

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Current thread: