-------- Forwarded Message --------
> From: tuxxer <tuxxer(a)cox.net>
> Reply-To: tuxxer(a)cox.net
> Cc: Rahul Sundaram <rahulsundaram(a)yahoo.co.in>
> Subject: Re: Hardening Doc Update 2
> Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 18:24:38 -0800
> Forwarded at the request of Rahul....
> On Sun, 2005-01-09 at 14:41 -0800, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Hi
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/ch-intro.html
> > " Most of the threats on the Internet typically target
> > Microsoft Windows systems."
> > I would like a tutorial on hardening Linux start out
> > with be task based and focus on the concepts and guide
> > the users on specific tasks as well as the generic
> > ideas. Starting out with comparing the state of
> > Windows on the first sentence seems to be unnecessary.
> > "This tutorial is a basic walk-through of how to
> > harden a basic install of Fedora Core"
> > I would like this to be the first sentence instead.
> > replace "install" with "installation". If you must
> > mention that these concepts will also likely to apply
> > on other linux distributions too then add that as a
> > note. its usually not important to the audience you
> > target
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/ch-chapter1.html
> > " This section will not go into the actual process of
> > installing packages, that falls under the scope of the
> > Installation Guide."
> > not really. that falls under the scope under a short
> > package management guide which is not yet written by
> > anyone. just mention that you dont cover this topic in
> > this guide and that should be enough. If a document
> > covering this is written, then you can revise your
> > guide to add a link to that doc
> > "1.1.1. Package Selections During Install"
> > while the basic idea is sound, the example of sendmail
> > is wrong. sendmail is installed to send out
> > notifications to users. dont override the distribution
> > design decisions with your document. if you are not
> > sure of why a particular package is installed or
> > activated for a particular setup then please try and
> > consult with the developers in the fedora-devel list.
> > its usually there for a reason
> > "1.1.2. Package Considerations for Installation of New
> > Software"
> > I would rewrite this section as follows.
> > If you are installing new software thats is part of
> > fedora core or extras repository its checked for
> > integrity using a mechanism called gpg. This is
> > enabled by default for package managers like yum and
> > up2date. However be careful about installing software
> > from untrusted sources. You should not install random
> > packages with root permissions as such software can be
> > either buggy or introduce security problems in your
> > system.
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/sysid-and-role.html
> > The first two questions seem to be redundant. Fedora
> > core installation types are targetted towards three
> > kinds of users
> > Personal desktop users
> > Workstation
> > Server
> > Using these as examples for system role is likely to
> > be better for the understanding of end users
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/gui-update.html
> > screenshots showing blue,red icons etc as status
> > notifications is useful here
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/cli-updates.html
> > yum check-update though useful is not actually
> > necessary for updating the system. users can just run
> > yum update and choose when prompted
> > It seems that the kernel is not updated by default. I
> > am not sure whether this behavior has changed
> > recently. if not this should be documented.
> > "Warning
> > If there are any failed dependencies, you will be
> > asked if you want to download and install the
> > dependencies. Most of the time, you should do this. "
> > this isnt actually a warning. Software dependencies
> > are not something abnormal. The terminology "failed
> > dependencies" is incorrect. Use "unresolved
> > dependencies" instead. change this into a note
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/userconfig-cli.html
> > Usually system users (uid <500) are created and
> > removed by packages concerned with it. users might be
> > better off removing the package itself if they are in
> > no need for it. its a rare case where users would want
> > to have the package installed by the user removed. the
> > package wouldnt work without the concerned user. so
> > why have it at all?
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/ch-chapter2.html
> > kernel hardening is not vital to the system. Its not
> > usually part of a typical security guide. If you are
> > not going to cover this topic, just add a note in some
> > other section or remove it altogether. I dont think
> > fedora with selinux enabled would actually require
> > proactive kernel level hardening
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/ch-chapter3.html
> > please link to the appropriate section Introduction to
> > Linux guide in tldp.org where the basis concepts of
> > file permissions are explained in a clear way instead
> > of repeating them here
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/umask.html
> > the default umask is just fine for fedora since every
> > user has his own group. its not advisable to change it
> > for the typical setup
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/limit-root.html
> > the first two sections should be expanded to cover the
> > details
> > "
> > Unless you are starting a GUI application that
> > requires root permissions, you will not be prompted
> > for the root password if attempting to execute a
> > command that requires root permissions. You will just
> > get a "Permission Denied" error.
> > "
> > usually but not in all cases. up2date is an exception
> > to this for example
> > " Unfortunately, there isn't yet a Fedora GUI tool for
> > editing SSH configuration"
> > ssh configuration is done by sys administrators in a
> > server setup which is likely to run without a gui. end
> > users do not require ssh server nor would they need a
> > gui. I do not think this comment is appropriate here
> > 4.3. Configuring and Using sudo
> > su - switch user
> > sudo - switch user do <task>
> > you might want to mention this.
> > http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/shells.html
> > again, users might actually want to just remove non
> > administrative users rather than just changing their
> > shell
> > I believe this document lacks details in what it aims
> > to covers. If you are just going to cover a few
> > details then it might be better to just cover security
> > details for particular type of roles
> > for example, desktop users might know just a few basic
> > security practises
> > 1) do not run as root
> > 2) install only software you want and do not install
> > them from random sources
> > 3) make sure you keep these software updated.
> > priortise security and bug fixes and skip feature
> > enhancements if not required
> > that really sums it up. of course you need to explain
> > the rationales and additonal details and that would be
> > a short to the point guide. server security is much
> > more detailed.
> > this document in my opinion doesnt serve its purpose
> > currently and should either be expanded to cover
> > security in a much more detailed way or just target
> > the desktop users and point to other docs for details
> > if necessary
> > =====
> > Regards
> > Rahul Sundaram
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
gpg: 57EB F948 76AE 25BC E340 EFA9 FAF6 E1AC F1E1 1EA1
Ok guys, sorry I've been gone for so long. It seems others have been
out as well. Anyhow, I've finished the hardening doc, and would like to
get some feedback: glaring omissions, errors, etc. I have to try to
remember what my bug number is (it HAS been a while), and once I get
some feedback, I'll post it up there so it can hopefully go to editing.
Check out the html version at http://members.cox.net/tuxxer/ .