"Benjamin J. Weiss" a écrit :
>
> > I need to open the 8901, 4446 and ports for my installation. I
> > cannot find anything about this on the Red Hat documentation pages
>
> You need to adjust the rules for your iptables. There's a gui way (the
> command for which I can't remember, since
> I need to open the 8901, 4446 and ports for my installation. I
> cannot find anything about this on the Red Hat documentation pages
You need to adjust the rules for your iptables. There's a gui way (the
command for which I can't remember, since I never use it) and a text
way. You can, as
With lots and lots of ABSOLUTELY TERRIFIC help from Webct Support, I
have finally succeeded in installing Webct on a Test server using Linux 9.0.
Now I find that Linux 9.0's Security configuration is set for high and
only for SSH and HTTP. The interface allows me to select certain
functions su
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Dave Wreski wrote:
>The list is pretty much dead. We've picked up where they've left off, over
>at linuxsecurity.com:
Thank you very kindly.
- -d
- --
David Talkington
http://www.spotnet.org
PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/dt000823.asc
-BEGI
ver
at linuxsecurity.com:
Linux Weekly Security News
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/newsletter.html
Linux Weekly Vulnerability List
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/vuln-newsletter.html
Linux Security Discussion List
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/general/mailingl
Hi David,
> I get no mail at all on the linux-securiy list, though the signup page
> says I'm subscribed (and have been for a year or so). Is there
> something wrong on my end, or is that list dormant?
There is something wrong with that list. I haven't had any mail from it sinc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi folks -
I get no mail at all on the linux-securiy list, though the signup page
says I'm subscribed (and have been for a year or so). Is there
something wrong on my end, or is that list dormant?
- -d
- --
David Talkington
http://www.spotnet.org
PGP key:
On 31-May-00 at 18:44:52 Alan Mead wrote:
> At 01:12 AM 5/31/00 , Krikofer wrote:
>>Hi. My friend had told me that Linux does not have a good
>>firewall. Linux can be broken into easily (according to his job's system
>>administrator). Would any of you know if this is true? He says his
>>fri
First of all I apologize for sending HTML email. I did not realize it. I
hope I send it right this time.
Second, thank you for all your replies. It makes sense that all OS's have
vulerabilities. Security depends alot on good written programs and the
System Administrators' knowledge, experienc
At 01:12 AM 5/31/00 , Krikofer wrote:
>Hi. My friend had told me that Linux does not have a good
>firewall. Linux can be broken into easily (according to his job's system
>administrator). Would any of you know if this is true? He says his
>friend likes Linux. Any facts?
>
>CH
This is a to
While no system is 100% secure, I've tweaked my linux system to the
point that most people simply give up when trying to break into my Linux
box. I run SAINT and nmape on a regular basis and check my logs
regularly. I've seen people port scan me and try all sorts of tricks to
get in. After a fe
There is a RedHat derivative that is supposed to be much better at
out-ot-the-box security configuration, called KRUD:
http://www.tummy.com/krud/
John Aldrich wrote:
>
> On Wed, 31 May 2000, Krikofer wrote:
> >
> > Hi. My friend had told me that Linux does not have a good firewall. Linux can
On Wed, 31 May 2000, Krikofer wrote:
>
> Hi. My friend had told me that Linux does not have a good firewall. Linux can be
>broken into easily (according to his job's system administrator). Would any of you
>know if this is true? He says his friend likes Linux. Any facts?
>
> CH
>
--
On Tue, May 30, 2000 at 11:12:31PM -0700, Krikofer wrote:
> Hi. My friend had told me that Linux does not have a good firewall. Linux can be
>broken into easily (according to his job's system administrator). Would any of you
>know if this is true? He says his friend likes Linux. Any facts?
At 23:12 2000-05-30 -0700, Krikofer wrote:
>Hi. My friend had told me that Linux does not have a good firewall.
>Linux can be broken into easily (according to his job's system
>administrator). Would any of you know if this is true? He says his
>friend likes Linux. Any facts?
The fact is that some
Krikofer,
Well, there is ipchains. It's free. It probably stops somewhere between
90 and 99.5% of all attacks. (I'm not a security expert.)
I know that there are commercial firewalls available, but I haven't
tried them. What people seem to ask for from ipchains, is to implement a
'statefull fire
Hi,
first: please don't post html-Emails to mailinglists. There are many users
here who works with email-clients that don't support that.
> Hi. My friend had told me that Linux does not have a good firewall.
> Linux can be broken into easily (according to his job's system
> administrator). W
Hi. My friend had told me that Linux does not have a
good firewall. Linux can be broken into easily (according to his job's
system administrator). Would any of you know if this is true? He
says his friend likes Linux. Any facts?
CH
itive response about starting some form of
co-ordinated effort to audit core linux components/daemons/suid binaries
etc.
To this effect, there's a mailing list for discussion of linux security
auditing and hardening;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe address is
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
NOTE! This
At 08:29 PM 6/2/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Yes there is a huge amount of need for some source of Info for security
>in Linux/Redhat Linux.
>
> -Carl Johnson
Just a small note, here. I would be terribly disapointed if the mailing
list was only for the Linux core (
Yes there is a huge amount of need for some source of Info for security in
Linux/Redhat Linux.
-Carl Johnson
--
From: Bench
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 5:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: [linux-security] Re: RedHat5.1
iscussion of potential problems and auditing; definite problems
> discovered would still go to the usual forums of bugtraq and
> linux-security.
>
Yes, that would be nice!
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHa
web
> page to indicate which packages could do with auditing, and also a mailing
> list for unmoderated discussion of auditing. The mailing list would be
> only for discussion of potential problems and auditing; definite problems
> discovered would still go to the usual forums of bugt
ich packages could do with auditing, and also a mailing
>list for unmoderated discussion of auditing. The mailing list would be
>only for discussion of potential problems and auditing; definite problems
>discovered would still go to the usual forums of bugtraq and
>linux-security.
I had re
a mailing
list for unmoderated discussion of auditing. The mailing list would be
only for discussion of potential problems and auditing; definite problems
discovered would still go to the usual forums of bugtraq and
linux-security.
So, anyone interested should drop me a note. Likewise anyone with
e refer to the information about this list as well as general
information about Linux security at http://www.aoy.com/Linux/Security.
--
To unsubscribe:
mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
I got this from the ICMP info mailing list. Thought everyone might get some
use out of it.
>
> A Paper on Linux Security v1
>
>
>This text will describe how you can, from an unsecured new Linux system,
27 matches
Mail list logo
