Full Disclosure mailing list archives
SV: Re: Reacting to a server compromise
From: "martin scherer" <memoxyde () monet no>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 22:49:21 +0200
Don't get me wrong, I _just_ joined this list, and I'm nothing of a security expert... I'm just someone who tries to learn this stuff by watching others... But come on, seriously... You expect someone to cave in on a public list like this, even though you can "tear apart what little bit of technical knowledge he might have"? We all know that isn't going to happen... So I suggest (note: _suggest_...I have no authority here, thank god) you settle this outside the mailing list, cause flaming each other in here, where no one is about to cave in anytime soon, is pointless. Then again, I'm just a newbie, with absolutely no clue about what 70% of the discussions going on in here are about. So start the flaming. -m -----Opprinnelig melding----- Fra: full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com [mailto:full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com] På vegne av security snot Sendt: 4. august 2003 20:48 Til: Ron DuFresne Kopi: Richard Stevens; full-disclosure () lists netsys com Emne: RE: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Reacting to a server compromise Tina Bird isn't much of a security expert, she's a belly dancer. What she likes to do is read generated logs (ie syslog and whatnot) and pretend that leaves sufficient information for a reliable audit trail. Ron, I've been asked by the moderators of this list to stop engaging you in conversation, but I can't help myself - please shut the fuck up you no skilled, self promoting moron. You don't even understand how worthless any of Tina Bird's "contributions" to security have been, because she's a name you're familiar with you assume she must be worthwhile. I try to read this list objectively and I frequently take the time to assist users offlist to better understand certain matters. You however, contribute absolutely nothing, in any way, and I'm tired of you posting to this list like you're some sort of authority. You can take your years of experience in "home network security" (admittedly installing Zonealarm-type products and nothing more advanced) and go look for attention somewhere else. I expect you'll respond to this message with some insult about how I'm a "child" that needs to respect those "elders in the community" (such as you'd like to imply yourself being), and some other weak rhetoric. Keep in mind that you've pissed me off enough that I'll be more than happy to tear apart what little bit of technical knowledge you might have and shame you publically, here and in any other forum that I see fit. So please, respond with some sort of insult to me, or some plea to Len to remove me from this list - there are a lot of people who would love to see how the Great Ron DuFresne of gForce Pakistan holds up to the booger Challenge. ----------------------------------------------------------- "Whitehat by day, booger at night - I'm the security snot." - CISSP / CCNA / A+ Certified - www.unixclan.net/~booger/ - ----------------------------------------------------------- On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Ron DuFresne wrote:
I believe the way to go to store a drive from a system is to make a dd copy to a new drive, remove the drive itself, and stoore it following proper chain of evidence proceedures, and do any forensics on the new drive. Now, if that's enough, perhaps not, in some instances the
machine
itself might need to be tored in a full chain of evidence process
also.
Tina Bird's sight might offer some infoo on this, she has popped up in many of these threads to clarify issues of such on the various lists
as
some of us have pondered without knowledge. Tina, you have any words
on
this to offer up? Thanks, Ron DuFresne On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Richard Stevens wrote:I'd be interested to know if a ghost image (or even hardware systems like image-master) carrys over deleted files to the new image?.. as these can usually be undeleted easily enough. anyone know? I'd guess the safest way is just to keep the orignal drive.. but if
it's
a nice big expensive scsi raid set I'd guess this probably isnt practical. -----Original Message----- From: Alexandre Dulaunoy [mailto:alexandre.dulaunoy () ael be] Sent: 03 August 2003 20:01 To: devnull () iprimus com au Cc: full-disclosure () lists netsys com Subject: [Full-disclosure] Re: Reacting to a server compromise On 03/Aug/03 12:33 +1000, devnull () iprimus com au wrote:On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 01:38 am, Jennifer Bradley wrote:If this happens again, I would probably make a copy of the harddrive,or at the very least the log files since they can be entered as evidence of a hacked box.Under most jurisdictions, an ordinary disk image produced by
Norton
Ghost etcusing standard hardware is completely inadmissible in court, as it
is
impossible to make one without possibly compromising the integrity
of
theevidence. The police etc use specialised hardware for making suchcopies,which ensures that the disk can't have been altered.Getting evidence by reading (via any software or hardware
solution)
may compromise the integrity of the evidence. I would like to know
the
difference between for example a (s)dd and the specialised
hardware
that you talk about ? Do you have any references ? Preserving the scene integrity is really difficult. You have
to
minimize the intrusion to the scene. On computer hardware is
really
difficult... Using a hardware device that doesn't change too much
the
scene is difficult... (think of a compromised disk firmware). And the worst, sometimes we see something that doesn't exist
at
all. Forensic analysis is the land of illusion... just my .02 EUR. adulau -- -- Alexandre Dulaunoy (adulau) -- http://www.foo.be/ -- http://pgp.ael.be:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x44E6CBCD -- "Knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance -- that we can solve them" Isaac Asimov _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Cutting the space budget really restores my faith in humanity. It eliminates dreams, goals, and ideals and lets us get straight to the business of hate, debauchery, and self-annihilation." -- Johnny Hart ***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!*** OK, so you're a Ph.D. Just don't touch anything. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- Re: Hard drive images, (continued)
- Re: Hard drive images madsaxon (Aug 05)
- Re: Reacting to a server compromise Mark (Aug 02)
- Re: Re: Reacting to a server compromise Jennifer Bradley (Aug 03)
- Re: Re: Reacting to a server compromise morning_wood (Aug 03)
- Re: Re: Reacting to a server compromise manohar singh (Aug 03)
- Re: Reacting to a server compromise James A. Cox (Aug 03)
- Re: Re: Reacting to a server compromise morning_wood (Aug 03)
- RE: Re: Reacting to a server compromise Richard Stevens (Aug 04)
- Re: Re: Reacting to a server compromise Frank Bruzzaniti (Aug 04)
- RE: Re: Reacting to a server compromise Ron DuFresne (Aug 04)
- RE: Re: Reacting to a server compromise security snot (Aug 04)
- SV: Re: Reacting to a server compromise martin scherer (Aug 04)
- RE: Re: Reacting to a server compromise madsaxon (Aug 04)
- Re: Re: Reacting to a server compromise Darren Reed (Aug 04)
- RE: Reacting to a server compromise Brad Bemis (Aug 04)
- RE: Reacting to a server compromise Brad Bemis (Aug 04)
- RE: Reacting to a server compromise Jones, David H (Aug 04)
- Re: Reacting to a server compromise Jason Ellison (Aug 04)
- Re: Re: Reacting to a server compromise northern snowfall (Aug 04)
- RE: Reacting to a server compromise John . Airey (Aug 05)