From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 14 10:09:13 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2E3E16A4CE for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:09:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mongers.org (miracle.mongers.org [193.162.142.71]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3062D43D2F for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:09:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jlouis@mongers.org) Received: (qmail 31105 invoked by uid 1030); 14 Jan 2004 18:09:31 -0000 From: "Jesper Louis Andersen" Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 19:09:31 +0100 To: D J Hawkey Jr Message-ID: <20040114180931.GA17074@miracle.mongers.org> References: <20040114134215.GA21307@sheol.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040114134215.GA21307@sheol.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: security at FreeBSD Subject: Re: mtree vs tripwire X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting] List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:09:13 -0000 Quoting D J Hawkey Jr (hawkeyd@visi.com): > This might seem really naive, but can mtree be used effectively as > a native-to-core-OS tripwire equivalent? Would it be as efficient in > terms of time-to-run and resource requirements? > > What sort of pitfalls should I be aware of? Yes, it can: Pro: distributed with base Con: Only available for *BSD architectures as far as my knowledge goes. What it means is that if you want to cryptographically hash a Linux-box tripwire might be better to use because you would get a common interface across your platforms. On the other hand, last time I looked tripwire was a magnificient piece of bloat. -- j.