lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:52:23 +0000 From: "Ali Varshovi " <ali.varshovi@...mail.com> To: "full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk " <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk> Subject: Re: Linux - Indicators of compromise Hello everybody and thank you for your useful comments. Now I'm thinking that we need a comparison base or normal behavior profile to be able to detect any deviations or abnormal/suspicious activity. While some known patterns of behaviors are useful to detect malware or backdoors we still need that normal profile to detect 0-day or APT style intrusions. Isn't that the same idea from early days of intrusion detection research (anomaly detection approach)? Or maybe I'm off track. Thoughts? ------Original Message------ To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk Subject: Linux - Indicators of compromise Sent: Jul 14, 2012 8:46 AM Greetings FD, Does anyone have any guidelines/useful material on analysis logs of a Linux machine to detect signs of compromise? The data collection piece is not a challenge as a lot of useful information can be captured using commands and some scripts. I'm wondering if there is any systematic approach to analyze the collected logs? Most of the materials I've seen are more aligned to malware and rootkit detection which is not the only concern apparently. Thanks, Ali . --------------------------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry device _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists