Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Unix/Linux rootkits 101

Filed under
Security

The term rootkit originated with a reference to the root user account on Unix systems. Rootkits are not limited to Unix, however, or even to administrative user accounts like the Unix root account. No matter what operating system you use, you should be familiar with good practices for detecting and dealing with the threat of rootkits.

What is a rootkit?

As Mike Mullins explained in Windows rootkits 101, rootkits are not exploits. They are not the means of cracking security and accessing your system in the first place. Instead, rootkits are inserted into your system after it has already been compromised for the first time. Rootkits then cover the malicious security cracker’s tracks when he or she revisits the system later, or the tracks of other malicious software left behind. A rootkit may also include a “back door” allowing the security cracker to gain access at any time in the future.

On Unix systems such as Solaris or FreeBSD, and on Unix-like systems such as Linux, a number of different means may be employed to cover the security cracker’s tracks. Common tactics include replacing system utility binaries such as ls and diff so that when they are used they will hide changes to the system and files on it from the user. The key point to keep in mind when dealing with the threat of rootkits is that once a rootkit has been installed on your system, you are no longer able to trust any of the tools installed on that system to give you accurate information.

This can make accurate detection of rootkits and other changes to a system by malicious security crackers a challenge.

Rootkit detection




Also:

Like a lot of people, I use the free anti-virus program Clamav on my mail server. Last week, I was seriously impressed with its performance.

It started last wednesday, 25 July. At about noon, I received a mail by amavisd-new that it had blocked an e-mail containing a virus, Trojan.Downloader-11827. What was strange, is that I received this message on an e-mail account which is protected by my ISPs proprietary anti-virus solution. So it had not caught this virus, while Clamav did. Then I submitted the file to virustotal.com, and apparently only a few (about five) anti-virus programs detected the virus. Amongst others, Kaspersky, F-Secure, NOD32, Bitdefender, Symantec and of course Clamav. In the clamav-virusdb mailing list archives, I found that Clamav had detection for this virus since 7h21 CEST, so it was really amongs the first to detect this virus.

Clamav is great

More in Tux Machines

OpenBSD Gets Mitigated For Meltdown CPU Vulnerability

  • OpenBSD Gets Mitigated For Meltdown CPU Vulnerability
    A few days back FreeBSD 11 stable was mitigated for Meltdown (and Spectre vulnerabilities), which came more than one month after these nasty CPU vulnerabilities were disclosed while DragonFlyBSD was quickly mitigated and the first of the BSDs to do so. While OpenBSD is known for its security features and focus, only today did it land its initial Meltdown mitigation.
  • Meltdown fix committed by guenther@

    Meltdown mitigation is coming to OpenBSD. Philip Guenther (guenther@) has just committed a diff that implements a new mitigation technique to OpenBSD: Separation of page tables for kernel and userland. This fixes the Meltdown problems that affect most CPUs from Intel. Both Philip and Mike Larkin (mlarkin@) spent a lot of time implementing this solution, talking to various people from other projects on best approaches.

    In the commit message, Philip briefly describes the implementation [...]

France Proposes Software Security Liability For Manufacturers, Open Source As Support Ends

It sometimes seems as though barely a week can go by without yet another major software-related hardware vulnerability story. As manufacturers grapple with the demands of no longer building simple appliances but instead supplying them containing software that may expose itself to the world over the Internet, we see devices shipped with insecure firmware and little care for its support or updating after the sale. The French government have a proposal to address this problem that may be of interest to our community, to make manufacturers liable for the security of a product while it is on the market, and with the possibility of requiring its software to be made open-source at end-of-life. In the first instance it can only be a good thing for device security to be put at the top of a manufacturer’s agenda, and in the second the ready availability of source code would present reverse engineers with a bonanza. Read more

today's howtos

Security: Updates, Word and More