By Jake Edge
August 17, 2011
Red Hat does a good job of looking at the security problems found and fixed
in its enterprise distributions. It issues periodic reports on those
security problems to try to give its customers—and interested
bystanders—a sense of how vulnerable their systems are over the
lifetime of a particular release. The most recent report
[PDF] looks at six years of security update data for RHEL 4.
The report was written by Red Hat security team lead Mark J. Cox, and looks
at two broad categories of security concerns: vulnerabilities and threats.
Even a cursory glance at the vulnerability information makes it clear that
the most numerous flaws come in web browsers. That may not affect too
many RHEL customers for a couple of reasons. Most RHEL installations are for
servers where browsers are not installed by default and are probably rarely
installed by administrators. In addition, browser vulnerabilities require
visiting a malicious or compromised site and, even on systems where a
browser is installed, one would think that administrators would be fairly
careful about which sites are visited.
For desktop or workstation systems, of course, a web browser is standard
fare. Over the six years, there have been nearly 200 critical flaws in
Mozilla products (which includes Firefox, Seamonkey, and Thunderbird). By
way of contrast, the default server install of RHEL 4 has only suffered
from 20 critical flaws in that time.
Beyond the Mozilla products (which are the top three entries in the table
of "worst security history" in the report), the packages that had multiple
critical issues include Samba and Kerberos. Another desktop-oriented
package appears in the list, HelixPlayer, which was
eventually dropped from RHEL 4 because it was proprietary code that could
no longer have its security problems fixed. While
the kernel is number four on the list, it has had zero critical
vulnerabilities during RHEL 4's lifetime (though there have been nearly 300
vulnerabilities at lower severity levels). It is clear that avoiding
browsers and other desktop software will make for a system with fewer
updates needed—something that's not really possible for many users,
but should be for server systems.
But there clearly were flaws beyond the browser, and the report breaks out
the two dozen or so critical flaws in the other packages. The list shows
the CVE number (and Red Hat advisory number), whether it is a default
package or not (most were), a short description of the vulnerability, and
the so-called "days of risk". That measure
is meant to give a rough guide of how long it was between the public
release of the vulnerability information until Red Hat had a fix
available. Those numbers were typically zero (a fix on the same day as the
disclosure), though there were some outliers including a seven day risk
window for a 2007 GnomeMeeting (now Ekiga) bug.
On the threats side of the ledger, Cox reports on the public exploits that were
found that tried to take advantage of the vulnerabilities in RHEL. The
exploits described were limited to those that "have the potential to
cause remote damage to the confidentiality or integrity of a
system". So, denial of service exploits were not
considered. For
the purposes of looking at the threats, "proof of concept" exploits were
counted, and that led to 80 public exploits of RHEL 4 vulnerabilities being
found.
There were 15 privilege escalation exploits, 22 web browser exploits (all
but three for Mozilla products, though Links, Lynx, and HelixPlayer each
had one), 17 "user-complicit" exploits (where the user needs to do something
to make it happen, like opening a file with a vulnerable application), and
9 exploits for PHP vulnerabilities (many of which were reported during the
"PHP month of bugs"). While some of those could certainly prove to be
problematic, the privilege escalations in particular, they often
require a hard-to-engineer set of circumstances—at least for
widespread exploitation. The most dangerous group are the 17 public
exploits that were found for services, many of which would be running on a
default RHEL install.
The report also noted the lack of any known Linux worms since 2005. There
were two in that year, but both were exploiting PHP flaws in applications
that are not shipped with RHEL 4 (though could have been installed by the
administrator separately).
The full report is well worth a read for those who are interested. It does
a good job reporting on the security vulnerability landscape for RHEL 4,
but, more importantly, gives even those who don't run RHEL a useful look at
the type and severity of Linux security problems. It would be
nice to see more distributions, especially those targeting enterprises,
produce similar reports.
Comments (none posted)
Brief items
Why use Ubuntu's Natty Narwhal? Sure, it's fun to say "Natty Netadmin
Netbook," but won't any Linux work? Of course it will, and if you have a
favorite, by all means use it.
--
Carla
Schroder by way of ITworld
Comments (none posted)
SmartOS is a new Solaris/IllumOS-based
distribution
released by Joyent. "
SmartOS incorporates the four most
revolutionary OS technologies of the past decade - Zones, ZFS, DTrace and
KVM - into a single operating system, providing an arbitrarily observable,
highly multi-tenant environment built on a reliable, enterprise-grade
storage stack." Yes, they have
ported the
KVM virtualization facility from Linux to Solaris.
Comments (48 posted)
The Debian Project celebrates the 18th anniversary of Ian Murdoch's
founding announcement. "
A lot has happened to the project and its
community in the past eighteen years. There have been eleven releases -
most recently Debian 6.0 "Squeeze" in February 2011 - and a huge amount of
free software packaged. The current "unstable" branch consists of more
than 35,000 binary packages for the amd64 architecture alone - over 44GB of
Free/Libre Software! Throughout this history Debian has maintained its
goals of technical excellence, accountability, and above all
freedom."
Full Story (comments: none)
The CentOS-5.6 Continuous Release (CR) repository is now available. "
This repository contains rpms to be included in the next CentOS-5.x release. Because these include security and bugfix updates, we strongly recommend everyone using CentOS-5 install and update their system using this repository."
Full Story (comments: none)
Distribution News
Ubuntu family
Ubuntu Global Jam is an event where local Ubuntu teams around the globe get
together to work on Ubuntu directly. "
It's a great opportunity for
new contributors to learn from their peers about translating, documenting,
bug triaging, testing, packaging and loads of other things related to
Ubuntu."
Full Story (comments: none)
Newsletters and articles of interest
Comments (none posted)
Brian Proffitt
presents
his choices for Best Desktop Distribution (Fedora), Best Laptop
Distribution (Ubuntu), Best Enterprise Desktop (SUSE Linux Enterprise
Desktop), Best Enterprise Server (Red Hat Enterprise Linux), Best LiveCD
(KNOPPIX), Best Security-Enhanced Distribution (BackTrack), and Best
Multimedia Distribution (Ubuntu Studio).
Comments (none posted)
Amber Graner has
interviewed Kate
Stewart about her work as the Ubuntu Release Manger at Canonical. "
My biggest personal challenge over the last year has been learning about the interactions in the user space applications and the different flavors' user interfaces. It's very challenging to figure out what the implications of a specific change are after we freeze, and to decide if it makes the product overall better or not. I expect I'll be learning for as long as I'm in this role (since the contents of a release continue to evolve), which is one of the reasons I'm enjoying myself so much. Luckily for me, the other members of release team span a wide range of different backgrounds and have been doing releases for quite a while, and are very willing to share their knowledge."
Comments (none posted)
Page editor: Rebecca Sobol
Next page: Development>>