OpenBSD: 4 Years Exploit Free 51
Teknoenie writes: "Upon a recent visit to the OpenBSD website http://www.openbsd.org i noticed a nifty change. 4 years without a remote exploit in default install. I have to dish out a big congrats to the OpenBSD team. Great job guys." It seems good to mention as well that now's a good time to order OpenBSD 2.9 if you're so inclined, since it's scheduled to ship in three weeks.
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
> I know of at least one remote SSH vulnerability that led to a root
> exploit in any OpenBSD version before 2.8.
teknoenie wrote:
> is this something that can be proven to the openbsd team.
Yes.
OpenBSD 2.7 was vulnerabile about remote root exploit with the default install. Please look at this advisory [bindview.com] and compare it with the fix by openbsd [freebsd.org].
cperciva wrote:
> I'm not sure about this, but I think what they mean is that there
> have been no vulnerabilities discovered before they were fixed
Actually above exploit is fixed by NetBSD people before OpenBSD. You can confirm this by the cvs log [freebsd.org].
bolverk wrote:
> Well, we can force ssh _clients_ to do X11 forwarding... not a root
> flaw, and not remote... so on to the next.
The above problem is a remote root flaw. Due to the reason I don't know, this flaw is not listed in OpenBSD's security page. Perhaps OpenBSD people don't have an ability to know their security information unlike they claimed?
Anyway, the "4 Years Exploit Free" message is just wrong.
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
If that is the point that "4 years exploit free" means, then FreeBSD and NetBSD should be better than OpenBSD, because they are 8 years exploit free (i.e. security holes are fixed in FreeBSD-current and NetBSD-current before advisories are released).
4 years without a PUBLIC exploit (Score:1)
I am just weary of the fact that there may be script kiddies out there with exploits for things that noone has found yet. This brings up the possibility of all OpenBSD releases being affected, purely because we dont know whats being exploited, and unless there are some extremely savvy systems administrators out there triple-checking their filesystems, and 24-hour surveilance ( overtime + ( time + 1/2 )! ), i doubt we'd know how.
Just food for thought, for the masses..
MS-DOS: 15 years without a remote root exploit! (Score:1)
I really doubt that OpenBSD by default turns on any services that are useful...this is like saying MS-DOS is 15 years without a remote root exploit.
What I'd find interesting with OpenBSD: are there any remote non-root exploits, that can be escalated to root by a seperate exploit after normal user access is granted, in the last 4 years?
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:2)
No, you get a decent workable machine with no extraneous crud in it.
That's the key, You pick what's right for you, rather than the RedHat "Kitchen Sink" approach.
It can run the vast majority of Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, and SVR4 binaries. OpenBSD just rocks.
grubbyRe:4 years without a remote hole?! (Score:1)
-lx
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
-lx
Re:Ilegal to redistribute ISO's of OpenBSD? (Score:2)
that is bootable on a sparc, that contains a
mac68k-kernel and have precompiled stuff for
pmax'es. Most people need the x86 files, and
those files are *easily* ftp:d from the main
ftp server, put on any cd9660 and then used from
the floppy install. There is no *real* need to
have the original ISO's if you want to grab
obsd-for-your-pc for free. Secondly, as many
will point out, it would be nice if you helped
the project out with few few bucks that a real
cd will cost you. Still, if you want to leech
openbsd for your single platform, you'd be silly
to download all other platforms. Noone ever
downloads debian for m68k on their pc's just
to have "the latest", do they? =)
Re:factors involved in exploited systems (Score:1)
There are lettle or no exploits not only because OpenBSD is less used than Linux or Solaris but mostly because the are not holes to exploit. Read their claim: "Four years without a hole in the default install"
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
Huh?
OpenBSD 2.7 was the first to have OpenSSH (or _any_ SSH in the default install, and you said "prior to 2.8" so let's have a look at the errata [openbsd.org] page to see just how full of s--t you are.
Well, we can force ssh _clients_ to do X11 forwarding... not a root flaw, and not remote... so on to the next.
The non-default UseLogin feature can cause an exploit on other operating systems. Nope... no problem there.
And... the installer fails to set things up so ssh works at all on the m68k installer. So please, do tell... what the hell are you blabbering about?
Re:Not exactly something to be proud of (Score:1)
Re:Not exactly something to be proud of (Score:1)
Re:Not exactly something to be proud of (Score:1)
Re:Do not trust QuantumG (Score:1)
Not exactly something to be proud of (Score:3)
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
Re:Ilegal to redistribute ISO's of OpenBSD? (Score:2)
Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
4 years (Score:3)
IMO OpenBSD defines what security should be in all operating systems. Its OS is highly scrutinized prior to any version being released, and the team reacts quickly at the slightest whiff about a security issue.
After hanging out in #openbsd (/nick rwxr--r-- && sil) on the efnet for the past year or so, I've determined that most of the "hardcore" developers are extremely dedicated to making Open as secure as possible for the love of security strictly. I've met no troll developers looking to brag about getting OpenBSD to the level it is now.
Sadly however, many people tend to think that OpenBSD is a one man show (Theo) and turn their distaste for one person into an OpenBSD bashing session. Its ironic many will try to bash the OS for that "one" person, and fill a forum or email thread with useless words never once focusing on the fact that OpenBSD is unrootable on a default installation something which no other OS can claim.
greets to all the guys who work on the OS at their leisure their work is appreciated.
rwxr--r--
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:2)
But I don't keep up to date on OpenBSD stuff so I may be totally wrong here.
Re:4 years without a remote hole?! (Score:3)
Re:4 years without a remote hole?! (Score:1)
Look, I've obviously touched a raw nerve here, but I really do think you are over-reacting. The comment was about the fish, using a word which has been hijacked from it's (also hijacked) current meaning. It was not about gays.
I also think that gays should also be game as the butt of jokes in the same way that straights are to gay comedians.
As to one of your earlier comments, I think you will find that there was quite a high percentage of gays amongst the Nazi party. I know that the SA was more gay than straight.
Re:4 years without a remote hole?! (Score:1)
Re:4 years without a remote hole?! (Score:1)
Also, calling a fish gay is not bigotry. At least no more than welshing on a bet is, and I've never complained about people using that phrase.
Re:4 years without a remote hole?! (Score:1)
Apple DOS 3.3, 20+ years no remote exploit! (Score:2)
:)
Similarly for MS-DOS
Link.
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
Anyway, a good portion of things auto installed in OSes tend to be out of date. I would rather install the most current version, then mess with the old version, or the weird custom version (apache on mandrake).
I like bare bones installs.
Oh, and the last Sendmail root exploit was linux only.
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
Ilegal to redistribute ISO's of OpenBSD? (Score:2)
If so, why isn't anyone doing? (Political thing?)
Re:4 years without a remote hole?! (Score:1)
i don't mind jokes. i do mind having my sexuality used as a general descriptor for everything that's seen as lame and pathetic in this world. there is a difference between humour and offensive bigotry
or perhaps you think that it's ok that people like me should feel hurt and humiliated by someone's comments just so long as people like you find the joke funny?
and i have a fucking life (now at least, i had to pretty much fight for it having grown up at a time when guys fucking guys was seen as pretty unthinkable).
=me= unclench? haha! (they don't call me slack alice for nothing mate)
=me= fuck off? brave words from a little boy on the other end of a network connection? i suggest you come here and make me fuck off if you really think you're up to it mate?
time frames. (Score:3)
red hat linux - now three and a half days without an exploit!
--saint----
The base install is small. (Score:2)
Trolls throughout history:
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
This errata [openbsd.org] will show that SSH was in there for this release.
Comment removed (Score:3)
They don't want you to distribute an ISO (Score:1)
Cute fish! (Score:1)
Re:Not exactly something to be proud of (Score:1)
4 years without a remote hole?! (Score:1)
If OpenBSD hasn't had a remote hole in four years then how the hell did somebody break in and deface the site with that gay-looking fish?
Re:Cute fish! (Score:1)
Re:deceptive (Score:2)
Yeah, you know... cd'ing to the ports section of the application you want and typing 'make install clean'. Phew. Hard work.
which in turn makes it more vulnerable
Uhm, third-party apps don't make OpenBSD itself more vulnerable. Its not like if you install wuftpd on an OpenBSD box, the internal crypto subsystem would stop working, or it would suddenly drop your kern.securelevel to -1. Its the job of the admin to check out any services they are running for known exploits, perhaps grep the code for insecure functions, and do some active penetration tests (standard overflows, format strings, etc).
And don't tell me I don't know what I am talking about
You don't know what you are talking about.
I am a consultant who has installed OpenBSD on over 40 machines in 14 clients of the years
Great, I have installed OpenBSD on over 200 boxen and converted more than 25 people who used to use other BSD's and other Unicies (Solaris, UnixWare).
I don't see it doing more than the most basic Internet-facing stuff
Ho ho ho... I don't know where to begin with this comment. For one, I don't understand how you see this stuff as basic. Have you ever looked at the core code in OpenBSD? I bet you've never written IPSEC code, or a mail server. Whatever you're doing, it's obviously wrong, because you can do anything on an OpenBSD box that you can do with a Linux box, with the exception of stuff like video games, but don't blame that on OpenBSD... blame that on video card companies and gaming companies for not porting their software to BSD.
because the attitude of many of the chief OpenBSD developers turns off others who might work on the project
I've talked with Theo on many occasions, whether it be a question about OpenBSD, or about drivers or donations, and he has been more than helpful, and has even included smiley faces in his email. Maybe youre the one coming off as an asshole?
---------------
Perhaps they should qualify the meaning. (Score:1)
As for their honesty, take the local root exploit in the default install recently discovered as an example. The problem was a format string error, and it had been noted and fixed in CVS before the exploit was discovered, however it was not considered a security problem, so no patch was issued. Upon discovery of the problem a patch was immediately issued. Anyone who updated immediately wasn't vulnerable. However, because a hole was discovered in the current release, they considered it a local root exploit and updated the claim accordingly.
If they had issued a patch before any vulnerability was discovered, they would not have considered it a blemish on the record. The claim is valid, and the iterpretation is sensible, although perhaps it is not the best possible interpretation.
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
Re:Ilegal to redistribute ISO's of OpenBSD? (Score:2)
Let's not forget... (Score:2)
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
Lets keep it in mind that Theo et al are also a little slow to come forward with exploits. Most of the time they don't even make the openbsd.org page.
-EvilMonkeyNinja
a.k.a. Joseph Nicholas Yarbrough
Security Grunt by Day
Programmer by Night
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
@#$@
1)OpenSSH shiped with OpenBSD 2.7 is vulnerable to a remote root exploit.
2)Sendmail is vulnerable to several exploits.
3)To call me ignorant only shows your low knowledge. Perhaps you should learn a little more about Redhat. Kitchen sink is a quite good approach. I don't think you understand anything. Any real network admin has distro disks for servers. So what if it takes you 20 minutes to make he auto install disk... it's totally worth it when you have a *REAL* job and *REAL* deadlines. (Not some 3l33t college kid who takes 12 hours to build his machine.
4)You are resorted to re-peating ignorate falcities at this point. Read up bitch so you don't embarass yourself. You so called "Network OS" is a wonderfull OS. I use it and love it. It is not worthy of any more flames than linux is. (windows perhaps) (definaly hurd)
So this is a big fuck you just for you. Some blue balled teen... with nuttin to do.
Maybe we can learn to get along a bit and stop being such an ignorant zealot. It's bullshit. All OSes have strengths and weaknesses. (Like most Linux distros auto install) I'm sick of arguing what is better. Get a job... and get a life.
out.
-EvilMonkeyNinja
a.k.a. Joseph Nicholas Yarbrough
Security Grunt by Day
Programmer by Night
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
Also, the sendmail exploit is not linux only. I have confimed the exploit on linux, open/net/freebsd and show very promising results on bsdi. I do not believe this is a known vulnerability.
I think we are confused as to what "auto installed" means. I mean a custom set of pkg sets for slackware or a redhat install disk. What the hell are you talking about?
So, I needed to build a firewall. I did a netinstall of slackware, enabled IPMasq, and added about 10 rules, and poof I was done. That bare bones install was pretty damn nice.
I think people are far to zealotous about thier OS of choice. Also, so-called wierd custom versions are the best you can have. If you have a farm of webservers with others added regularly, it is easiest and fastest to spend an hour or two to create a custom install disk or package list. make a package or two (optimized for processor) of all the critical stuff.
-EvilMonkeyNinja
a.k.a. Joseph Nicholas Yarbrough
Security Grunt by Day
Programmer by Night
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)
Besides that, OpenBSD is not the easiest system to config and maintain, especially as compared to something with a pretty gui like NT. Is that a security weakness? No. Should network admins have the skills to work with OpenBSD? Probably. Is it possible that your average admin would be too limited by having to configure everything through vi to properly secure a host? Yes.
security in OpenBSD (Score:1)
Re:Maybe a little infalated.. (Score:1)