Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      13 Feb 2001 19:38:08 +0100
From:      Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
To:        Adam Laurie <adam@algroup.co.uk>
Cc:        dmp@pantherdragon.org, security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: syslogd -ss not part of extreme security option?
Message-ID:  <xzpzofqe8dr.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
In-Reply-To: Adam Laurie's message of "Tue, 13 Feb 2001 17:35:56 %2B0000"
References:  <3A88EB70.CC8CB78E@pantherdragon.org> <xzpelx2c3vp.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <3A89707C.A539BA9C@algroup.co.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Adam Laurie <adam@algroup.co.uk> writes:
> eh? no security bug is "known" until it's found & exploited. just
> because it hasn't been found doesn't mean it doesn't exist. switching
> off a network listener for syslog when you are not doing network logging
> is much more than a warm fuzzy feeling, it's closing a potential
> security hole. i do it on standard installs, let alone "extreme
> security".

It's not a listener. If you specify -s, the socket is half-closed so
you can use it to send log messages to other hosts, but can't receive.
If you specify -ss, the socket isn't opened at all so you can neither
send nor receive.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpzofqe8dr.fsf>