On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 2:13 PM, cto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <cto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ethan,
What are you talking about?
Patrick K.
On 2/22/2011 4:47 PM, Ethan Heidrick wrote:
IE: infrastructure is process based on detecting such side channeling<mailto:cto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <cto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
attacks excuse the pun, but revising SeLinux security authorization if
that is what you are suggesting would create an independent node of
programmable patches directed specific technique.
Where would an node discrimination in the coding be "hazardous" for such
red team analysis for penetration?
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 9:54 AM, cto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:cto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Need to add it myself, that human being is also error-prone,
i.e. last message I meant "waives" and wrote "waves"
such errors happen even in development, in software and in security
On 2/22/2011 12:43 PM, cto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sanjai,
Security is a complex business, I'm afraid that SELINUX is an
attempt to
simplify part of this job at least,
The more secure you want to make a system the more complex
naturally it
becomes,
however complexity is enemy of security by itself,
There is somewhat a dilemma, a paradox in here, I'm afraid it
cannot be
oversimplified as regular users would become security experts or such
simplification waves the need for security specialists
Best,
Patrick K.
On 2/22/2011 12:19 PM, Sanjai Narain wrote:
Hi Patrick: Thanks for your note. I understand that SELinux
does not
directly apply to Stuxnet since it targeted Windows. However, my
question was conceptually motivated: whether mandatory
access control
could have contained the impact of this worm, had it been
available. I
had thought that the answer is yes but wanted to find out
from other
experts. I believe you concur. Now, if only we could make
SELinux a lot
easier to use..... this is where one of my interests lie. --
Sanjai
On 2/22/2011 11:53 AM, cto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxmajordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:cto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello,
Stuxnet is a Windows Worm, and SELinux is Mandatory
Access Control for
Linux
on Linux SELinux can reduce the impact of such worms
if targeting Linux
boxes, but it is not a preemptive mechanism for not
having any kind of
compromise due to any vulnerability, Although if you
protect your
system
and targeted processes you may have reach the goal
of containing the
impact of possible compromises
Best,
Patrick K.
On 1/30/2011 5:20 PM, Sanjai Narain wrote:
Has there been thinking on whether
SELinux-hardened machines can avoid
the spread of Stuxnet-like worms? Thanks. --Sanjai
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the
selinux mailing
list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail tomajordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as
the message.
Sanjai,
SELinux is Mandatory Access Control for Linux
Stuxnet only compromises Windows, SCADA and PLC 7
systems (Siemens
systems)
it is a worm, for a worm to compromise a system you need
to have
certain vulnerabilities
It cannot compromise Linux (the same way); as that worm
has been
designed for particular purposes and taking advantages
of Windows
vulnerabilities
If you mean protecting a network using Linux front ends
or inline
systems Like IPS systems that's another story which is
irrelevant to
SELINUX actually (although an IPS system -Intrusion
Prevention system-
on Linux can take advantages of SELINUX)
in brief , theoretically in case of a worm for Linux, it
could be
contained if SELINUX is effectively used.
in practice Stuxnet is for Windows
Best,
Patrick K.
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux
mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail tomajordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> with
with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
