My linux box got hacked once..
but it was because my missus cracked the sads and attacked it with a hammer and flat head screw driver..
I got pictures any one wanna c 'em?
f2b:.
Printable View
My linux box got hacked once..
but it was because my missus cracked the sads and attacked it with a hammer and flat head screw driver..
I got pictures any one wanna c 'em?
f2b:.
78% of Linux Users Never Been Hacked
NT retains its logs after a full system compromise, Linux does not. (that pesky failure to segregate admins and operators keeps biting them in the ass) So a much larger percentage of successful Linux compromises go undetected.
*echo*
I left a FreeBSD box open all night after a fresh install because it was getting late, the next day I figured I would arm it. I saw a jacked up UID :#: in a paranoid guess I figured it was tainted and proceeded another fresh install. I don't remeber excactly what I saw that tweaked me I was still just starting to read the O'reilly "safe" book at the time. So I'm in a draw it was 'prolly nothin.
I know what a stepping stone is, my question to you is still the same how the hell can a *nix box be better than a Windows box. I know Universities that run Windows, and I know Universities that run *nix. As far as tools, there aren't many tools that you can get for one that you can't get for the other. So there once again. How is a *nix box better than a windows box?Quote:
By stepping stone I mean using the first box to crack other boxes. There are a few reasons for wanting to do this:
1. University often have more bandwidth then other machines, so some forms of attack will be faster.
2. It obscures your identity.
3. It gives you a place to store your tools and data.
The reason Linux makes a better stepping stone then Windows is because many of the best security tools/exploits are written for Linux first and remote interactivity is a lot more easier. Windows has telnet and SSH, but there are not as common or as useful as they are on a *nix box.
Give me one reason why a comprised Windows box is better than a comprised Windows box.
Give me something, because in all my reading, I haven't found any real reasons, I mean **** most things that *nix has Windows can get, and there are somethings, that are easier to do on a Windows box.
So give me some info, let me know what you know, that I somehow missed in all my reading. I guess I must of skipped that in all my *nix books, and hacking books, and tutorials.
Please pretty please, explain.
In any case that you can't, walk away now, before I start qouting books.
Because it's a Windows box? :DQuote:
Give me one reason why a comprised Windows box is better than a comprised Windows box.
1. Remotely manipulating the box is easier because SSH or Telnet on a *nix box is far more flexible then the alternatives on a Windows box (in my opinion at least).
2. Most *nix boxes will have compilers on them so you can compile your tools there if you so wish.
3. More *nix box then Windows boxes will have easy ways of transferring files (via FTP or SFTP).
4. A lot of exploits are written to be compiled in *nix environments, while you an use Cygwin on the Windows box why bother?
I’m not attacking *nix, I’m just saying *nix boxes make better attack boxes over all. I don’t understand why you seem to be getting upset about that statement.
I am not getting upset. Don't take it personal, I am just finding way to many people saying something without any facts to back it up. Part of the time, just shearly saying opinion. I feel that opinion isn't always the best way to show or say something.
Now, if what you were saying is all opinion, ok. I won't say anything, but if what you were saying is fact. Elaborate. Explain to me where I am amiss, in not getting 10,000 *nix zombie boxes.
I am just clearly trying to understand what you are talking about. Because to be honest, I am still lost. Everything that you have stated so far can be done on a Windows box. I can get a FTP up on a Windows box, I can download a compiler on a windows box.
As far as SSH and Telnet on a *nix box being more flexible, what do you mean by flexible?
Ever heard of putty. I love that program.
So at this present point, you still have not made one point as to how *nix boxes are better as a stepping stone.
Please show me where I am amiss, give me a link or something. I never have a problem being wrong.
So please make me wrong.
So far, you haven't shown me one thing that can't be done on both.
It’s just my opinion. You are right that you can do all of this with a Windows box, but it’s easier to do with a *nix box because many times the tools will already be there. In *nix you can do everything from the command line, but in Windows there’s a lot off stuff that you need the GUI for and if you don’t have terminal services/remote desktop or VNC on the box that can be hard (and all those GUI apps take more bandwidth then SSH).
That I will give you.
Actually there are somethings that can't be run from the command line on a *nix system, well atleast a RH one.
Try to start a service like, start up the apache server on RH9. You have to use the GUI system. Which ****ing erks the hell out of me.
I am still looking for the perfect command line distro, so I don't have to even install the GUI part.
That and I am still looking for a command line calculator, I think I am going to have to write one myself.
Please say that your joking?Quote:
Originally posted here by whizkid2300
That I will give you.
Actually there are somethings that can't be run from the command line on a *nix system, well atleast a RH one.
Try to start a service like, start up the apache server on RH9. You have to use the GUI system. Which ****ing erks the hell out of me.
I am still looking for the perfect command line distro, so I don't have to even install the GUI part.
You can run EVERYTHING from the command line in *nix :D
Unless ( i have to admit i never tried RH) RH is really that bad..... other than that, ive set up servers on many different *nix styles, using only the command line. Apache, squid, vsftpd, postfix, firewalls, IRCd's, BIND, webmin, sshd, telnetd, fingerd, everything on a system which does not even have a GUI installed.
Can someone with some more RH knowledge than me say anything about this?
/edit
If its true that RH needs a GUI to start services, then RH is a disgrace to all *nix systems. I cant imagine it.
Cheers.
I seem to recall on my RH 9 doing a:
/etc/init.d/httpd restart
to restart the web server.