Re: Linux - Indicators of compromise

["Ali Varshovi " <ali.varshovi () hotmail com>]

I wasn't initially, but that's where the discussion is taking me. I was thinking of collecting local logs from a Linux 
box and analyze them to determine if its been compromised or not. I understand a hybrid approach should be taken, 
including pattern detection to capture known malware/backdoors and a behavioral analysis to tag any abnormal behavior.

Michael mentioned a very true and good point that theoretically logs and behavior of a compromised system cannot be 
trusted. Other folks, also pointed that a data exfilteration usually follows a compromise and can be considered as a 
shared pattern for majority of attacks (I want to add command/control traffic myself).

Friends, is that a good summary of a high level approach?

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Benji <me () b3nji com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:31:12 
To: <ali.varshovi () hotmail com>
Cc: <full-disclosure () lists grok org uk>
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Linux - Indicators of compromise


SO you're talking about making a baseline?

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Ali Varshovi <ali.varshovi () hotmail com> wrote:
> Hello everybody and thank you for your useful comments.
>
> Now I'm thinking that we need a comparison base or normal behavior profile to be able to detect any deviations or 
> abnormal/suspicious activity. While some known patterns of behaviors are useful to detect malware or backdoors we 
> still need that normal profile to detect 0-day or APT style intrusions. Isn't that the same idea from early days of 
> intrusion detection research (anomaly detection approach)? Or maybe I'm off track.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> ------Original Message------
> To: full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
> Subject: Linux - Indicators of compromise
> Sent: Jul 14, 2012 8:46 AM
>
> 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/