Flaws raise red flag on Linux security

Flaws raise red flag on Linux security

But many users remain confident about the security of the open-source environment

Story by Jaikumar Vijayan

JANUARY 09, 2004 ( COMPUTERWORLD ) - A report earlier this week about a critical flaw in the Linux kernel was the latest in a series of recently discovered security problems with the popular open-source operating system. But many users were unfazed by the report and said Linux remains a solid and secure environment for running enterprise applications.

Poland-based iSec Security Research on Monday said it had found a critical flaw in a function used to manage virtual memory on Linux systems (see story). The flaw affects the 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6 versions of the Linux kernel, according to iSec.

The vulnerability could allow attackers to take administrative control of compromised systems and run attack code of their choice, an iSec advisory stated. ISec claimed that it had developed and successfully tested code that was capable of exploiting the flaw, although it added that actually launching such an attack wouldn't be easy.

The news follows the discovery of a similar flaw in the Linux 2.4 kernel last fall. In November, unknown attackers used that flaw to take down several servers belonging to the Debian Project, which produces a noncommercial Linux distribution. And last month, an attack on the Gentoo Linux Project compromised a server that was being used to download copies of Gentoo's Linux source code by users.

The rise in such incidents can be attributed to Linux's growing popularity, which makes it a more attractive target for malicious attackers, said David Wreski, CEO of Linux security vendor Guardian Digital Inc. in Allendale, N.J.

"The underground hacker community is very interested in Linux as a potential target," he said. "Because of the accessibility of the source code to everyone, it provides an equal opportunity for malicious attackers to find vulnerabilities and ways to exploit them."

Even so, Linux remains a secure environment, said John Cahill, senior network security engineer at Piedmont Natural Gas in Charlotte, N.C.

"I would say it is more secure than Microsoft and other environments because the code is looked over by so many people and it's so widely available that any vulnerabilities can be quickly identified and patched," Cahill said. Piedmont uses Linux for several e-mail-related functions and is considering its use for antispam purposes.

"There's not very much we've needed to do to secure Linux [applications]," said Joe Poole, manager for technical support at Boscov's Department Stores LLC in Reading, Pa. The company runs several virtual Linux servers on its mainframes that are protected by network and internal firewalls. All nonessential services, such as file transfers and Telnet, have been disabled. But there has been no need for the kind of constant patching and maintenance required for Windows, Poole said.

Linux distributors in general are also doing a better job of shipping products that have nonessential services disabled by default, said Paul Schmel, adjunct information security officer at the University of Texas at Dallas.

"The biggest plus that Linux has is that it's designed to allow users to be users and not administrators," Schmel said. "What Linux has that Windows doesn't have is ease of configuration from an administrator's standpoint. Stopping and starting services, configuring services to only respond on certain ports and interfaces is dramatically easier than it is with Windows."

Actually, I kind of like Photoshop. It's the most solid, capable application I've ever used. I also figure OS X will be just about OS perfection in 10.5 (or whenever all libraries are converted to 64-bit).

I like Photoshop, too. But there's no denying that it crashes a fair bit -- particularly when memory is tight and/or you're working with very large images.

OSX? OS perfection?!? Oh, puh-lease. What-ever.

I like Photoshop, too. But there's no denying that it crashes a fair bit -- particularly when memory is tight and/or you're working with very large images.

There speaks a boy who has only used it on Windows...

OSX? OS perfection?!? Oh, puh-lease. What-ever.

There speaks a boy who has only used Windows...

Some of us believe the OS should not intrude on the pleasure of computing... and certainly not to displace it. We also believe it should empower our productivity, not impede it!

I like Photoshop, too. But there's no denying that it crashes a fair bit -- particularly when memory is tight and/or you're working with very large images

Not for me, it's rock solid even on XP, even with high-res poster-size images. I've only had problems on Windows 9x.

OSX? OS perfection?!? Oh, puh-lease. What-ever.

It's far, far ahead of XP for sure. Recently someone tried to emulate the Exposé feature of OS X on Windows and it was a kluged memory and processor hog. Why is it bad? Windows doesn't have the necessary underlying architecture to pull off something like that. Same with the pseudo-transparency of windows. Other technical features abound.

Aside from that, the user interface from a usability point of view is far better, and yes I did study "Human Computer Interaction" including interface designs in college. MS does some of the most horrendous stuff.

Bush, you want to see Windows perfection? They just came out with a patch to the most recent MDAC buffer overflow exploit. This patch can kill the ability to login on that computer! There's a nice, long process that involves having your original Windows CD to recover from this.

If anyone gets hit by this, write me and I'll give the procedure to get you running again.

There speaks a boy who has only used it on Windows...

It's actually pretty stable on 2K SP2 and XP SP1. It would kill 9x in a heartbeat though due to the OS's poor memory management.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.