d777076f29
r355436 moved mitigation sysctls to machdep.mitigations but did not rationalize the sense of the invidual knobs. Clarify that the old names remain the canonical way to set these mitigations. Backwards compatibility will be maintained for the original names (e.g. hw.ibrs_disable), but not from the interim names (e.g. machdep.mitigations.ibrs.disable). Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
1096 lines
37 KiB
Groff
1096 lines
37 KiB
Groff
.\" Copyright (C) 1998 Matthew Dillon. All rights reserved.
|
|
.\" Copyright (c) 2019 The FreeBSD Foundation, Inc.
|
|
.\"
|
|
.\" Parts of this documentation were written by
|
|
.\" Konstantin Belousov <kib@FreeBSD.org> under sponsorship
|
|
.\" from the FreeBSD Foundation.
|
|
.\"
|
|
.\" Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
|
|
.\" modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
|
|
.\" are met:
|
|
.\" 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
|
|
.\" notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
|
|
.\" 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
|
|
.\" notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
|
|
.\" documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
|
|
.\"
|
|
.\" THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY AUTHOR AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
|
|
.\" ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
|
|
.\" IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
|
|
.\" ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
|
|
.\" FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
|
|
.\" DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
|
|
.\" OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
|
|
.\" HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
|
|
.\" LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
|
|
.\" OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
|
|
.\" SUCH DAMAGE.
|
|
.\"
|
|
.\" $FreeBSD$
|
|
.\"
|
|
.Dd December 11, 2019
|
|
.Dt SECURITY 7
|
|
.Os
|
|
.Sh NAME
|
|
.Nm security
|
|
.Nd introduction to security under FreeBSD
|
|
.Sh DESCRIPTION
|
|
Security is a function that begins and ends with the system administrator.
|
|
While all
|
|
.Bx
|
|
multi-user systems have some inherent security, the job of building and
|
|
maintaining additional security mechanisms to keep users
|
|
.Dq honest
|
|
is probably
|
|
one of the single largest undertakings of the sysadmin.
|
|
Machines are
|
|
only as secure as you make them, and security concerns are ever competing
|
|
with the human necessity for convenience.
|
|
.Ux
|
|
systems,
|
|
in general, are capable of running a huge number of simultaneous processes
|
|
and many of these processes operate as servers \(em meaning that external
|
|
entities can connect and talk to them.
|
|
As yesterday's mini-computers and mainframes
|
|
become today's desktops, and as computers become networked and internetworked,
|
|
security becomes an ever bigger issue.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
Security is best implemented through a layered onion approach.
|
|
In a nutshell,
|
|
what you want to do is to create as many layers of security as are convenient
|
|
and then carefully monitor the system for intrusions.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
System security also pertains to dealing with various forms of attacks,
|
|
including attacks that attempt to crash or otherwise make a system unusable
|
|
but do not attempt to break root.
|
|
Security concerns can be split up into
|
|
several categories:
|
|
.Bl -enum -offset indent
|
|
.It
|
|
Denial of Service attacks (DoS)
|
|
.It
|
|
User account compromises
|
|
.It
|
|
Root compromise through accessible servers
|
|
.It
|
|
Root compromise via user accounts
|
|
.It
|
|
Backdoor creation
|
|
.El
|
|
.Pp
|
|
A denial of service attack is an action that deprives the machine of needed
|
|
resources.
|
|
Typically, DoS attacks are brute-force mechanisms that attempt
|
|
to crash or otherwise make a machine unusable by overwhelming its servers or
|
|
network stack.
|
|
Some DoS attacks try to take advantages of bugs in the
|
|
networking stack to crash a machine with a single packet.
|
|
The latter can
|
|
only be fixed by applying a bug fix to the kernel.
|
|
Attacks on servers can
|
|
often be fixed by properly specifying options to limit the load the servers
|
|
incur on the system under adverse conditions.
|
|
Brute-force network attacks are harder to deal with.
|
|
A spoofed-packet attack, for example, is
|
|
nearly impossible to stop short of cutting your system off from the Internet.
|
|
It may not be able to take your machine down, but it can fill up your Internet
|
|
pipe.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
A user account compromise is even more common than a DoS attack.
|
|
Many
|
|
sysadmins still run standard
|
|
.Xr telnetd 8
|
|
and
|
|
.Xr ftpd 8
|
|
servers on their machines.
|
|
These servers, by default, do not operate over encrypted
|
|
connections.
|
|
The result is that if you have any moderate-sized user base,
|
|
one or more of your users logging into your system from a remote location
|
|
(which is the most common and convenient way to log in to a system)
|
|
will have his or her password sniffed.
|
|
The attentive system administrator will analyze
|
|
his remote access logs looking for suspicious source addresses
|
|
even for successful logins.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
One must always assume that once an attacker has access to a user account,
|
|
the attacker can break root.
|
|
However, the reality is that in a well secured
|
|
and maintained system, access to a user account does not necessarily give the
|
|
attacker access to root.
|
|
The distinction is important because without access
|
|
to root the attacker cannot generally hide his tracks and may, at best, be
|
|
able to do nothing more than mess with the user's files or crash the machine.
|
|
User account compromises are very common because users tend not to take the
|
|
precautions that sysadmins take.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
System administrators must keep in mind that there are potentially many ways
|
|
to break root on a machine.
|
|
The attacker may know the root password,
|
|
the attacker
|
|
may find a bug in a root-run server and be able to break root over a network
|
|
connection to that server, or the attacker may know of a bug in an SUID-root
|
|
program that allows the attacker to break root once he has broken into a
|
|
user's account.
|
|
If an attacker has found a way to break root on a machine,
|
|
the attacker may not have a need to install a backdoor.
|
|
Many of the root holes found and closed to date involve a considerable amount
|
|
of work by the attacker to clean up after himself, so most attackers do install
|
|
backdoors.
|
|
This gives you a convenient way to detect the attacker.
|
|
Making
|
|
it impossible for an attacker to install a backdoor may actually be detrimental
|
|
to your security because it will not close off the hole the attacker used to
|
|
break in originally.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
Security remedies should always be implemented with a multi-layered
|
|
.Dq onion peel
|
|
approach and can be categorized as follows:
|
|
.Bl -enum -offset indent
|
|
.It
|
|
Securing root and staff accounts
|
|
.It
|
|
Securing root \(em root-run servers and SUID/SGID binaries
|
|
.It
|
|
Securing user accounts
|
|
.It
|
|
Securing the password file
|
|
.It
|
|
Securing the kernel core, raw devices, and file systems
|
|
.It
|
|
Quick detection of inappropriate changes made to the system
|
|
.It
|
|
Paranoia
|
|
.El
|
|
.Sh SECURING THE ROOT ACCOUNT AND SECURING STAFF ACCOUNTS
|
|
Do not bother securing staff accounts if you have not secured the root
|
|
account.
|
|
Most systems have a password assigned to the root account.
|
|
The
|
|
first thing you do is assume that the password is
|
|
.Em always
|
|
compromised.
|
|
This does not mean that you should remove the password.
|
|
The
|
|
password is almost always necessary for console access to the machine.
|
|
What it does mean is that you should not make it possible to use the password
|
|
outside of the console or possibly even with a
|
|
.Xr su 1
|
|
utility.
|
|
For example, make sure that your PTYs are specified as being
|
|
.Dq Li insecure
|
|
in the
|
|
.Pa /etc/ttys
|
|
file
|
|
so that direct root logins via
|
|
.Xr telnet 1
|
|
are disallowed.
|
|
If using
|
|
other login services such as
|
|
.Xr sshd 8 ,
|
|
make sure that direct root logins are
|
|
disabled there as well.
|
|
Consider every access method \(em services such as
|
|
.Xr ftp 1
|
|
often fall through the cracks.
|
|
Direct root logins should only be allowed
|
|
via the system console.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
Of course, as a sysadmin you have to be able to get to root, so we open up
|
|
a few holes.
|
|
But we make sure these holes require additional password
|
|
verification to operate.
|
|
One way to make root accessible is to add appropriate
|
|
staff accounts to the
|
|
.Dq Li wheel
|
|
group (in
|
|
.Pa /etc/group ) .
|
|
The staff members placed in the
|
|
.Li wheel
|
|
group are allowed to
|
|
.Xr su 1
|
|
to root.
|
|
You should never give staff
|
|
members native
|
|
.Li wheel
|
|
access by putting them in the
|
|
.Li wheel
|
|
group in their password entry.
|
|
Staff accounts should be placed in a
|
|
.Dq Li staff
|
|
group, and then added to the
|
|
.Li wheel
|
|
group via the
|
|
.Pa /etc/group
|
|
file.
|
|
Only those staff members who actually need to have root access
|
|
should be placed in the
|
|
.Li wheel
|
|
group.
|
|
It is also possible, when using an
|
|
authentication method such as Kerberos, to use Kerberos's
|
|
.Pa .k5login
|
|
file in the root account to allow a
|
|
.Xr ksu 1
|
|
to root without having to place anyone at all in the
|
|
.Li wheel
|
|
group.
|
|
This
|
|
may be the better solution since the
|
|
.Li wheel
|
|
mechanism still allows an
|
|
intruder to break root if the intruder has gotten hold of your password
|
|
file and can break into a staff account.
|
|
While having the
|
|
.Li wheel
|
|
mechanism
|
|
is better than having nothing at all, it is not necessarily the safest
|
|
option.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
An indirect way to secure the root account is to secure your staff accounts
|
|
by using an alternative login access method and *'ing out the crypted password
|
|
for the staff accounts.
|
|
This way an intruder may be able to steal the password
|
|
file but will not be able to break into any staff accounts or root, even if
|
|
root has a crypted password associated with it (assuming, of course, that
|
|
you have limited root access to the console).
|
|
Staff members
|
|
get into their staff accounts through a secure login mechanism such as
|
|
.Xr kerberos 8
|
|
or
|
|
.Xr ssh 1
|
|
using a private/public
|
|
key pair.
|
|
When you use something like Kerberos you generally must secure
|
|
the machines which run the Kerberos servers and your desktop workstation.
|
|
When you use a public/private key pair with SSH, you must generally secure
|
|
the machine you are logging in
|
|
.Em from
|
|
(typically your workstation),
|
|
but you can
|
|
also add an additional layer of protection to the key pair by password
|
|
protecting the keypair when you create it with
|
|
.Xr ssh-keygen 1 .
|
|
Being able
|
|
to *-out the passwords for staff accounts also guarantees that staff members
|
|
can only log in through secure access methods that you have set up.
|
|
You can
|
|
thus force all staff members to use secure, encrypted connections for
|
|
all their sessions which closes an important hole used by many intruders: that
|
|
of sniffing the network from an unrelated, less secure machine.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
The more indirect security mechanisms also assume that you are logging in
|
|
from a more restrictive server to a less restrictive server.
|
|
For example,
|
|
if your main box is running all sorts of servers, your workstation should not
|
|
be running any.
|
|
In order for your workstation to be reasonably secure
|
|
you should run as few servers as possible, up to and including no servers
|
|
at all, and you should run a password-protected screen blanker.
|
|
Of course, given physical access to
|
|
a workstation, an attacker can break any sort of security you put on it.
|
|
This is definitely a problem that you should consider but you should also
|
|
consider the fact that the vast majority of break-ins occur remotely, over
|
|
a network, from people who do not have physical access to your workstation or
|
|
servers.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
Using something like Kerberos also gives you the ability to disable or
|
|
change the password for a staff account in one place and have it immediately
|
|
affect all the machines the staff member may have an account on.
|
|
If a staff
|
|
member's account gets compromised, the ability to instantly change his
|
|
password on all machines should not be underrated.
|
|
With discrete passwords, changing a password on N machines can be a mess.
|
|
You can also impose
|
|
re-passwording restrictions with Kerberos: not only can a Kerberos ticket
|
|
be made to timeout after a while, but the Kerberos system can require that
|
|
the user choose a new password after a certain period of time
|
|
(say, once a month).
|
|
.Sh SECURING ROOT \(em ROOT-RUN SERVERS AND SUID/SGID BINARIES
|
|
The prudent sysadmin only runs the servers he needs to, no more, no less.
|
|
Be aware that third party servers are often the most bug-prone.
|
|
For example,
|
|
running an old version of
|
|
.Xr imapd 8
|
|
or
|
|
.Xr popper 8 Pq Pa ports/mail/popper
|
|
is like giving a universal root
|
|
ticket out to the entire world.
|
|
Never run a server that you have not checked
|
|
out carefully.
|
|
Many servers do not need to be run as root.
|
|
For example,
|
|
the
|
|
.Xr talkd 8 ,
|
|
.Xr comsat 8 ,
|
|
and
|
|
.Xr fingerd 8
|
|
daemons can be run in special user
|
|
.Dq sandboxes .
|
|
A sandbox is not perfect unless you go to a large amount of trouble, but the
|
|
onion approach to security still stands: if someone is able to break in
|
|
through a server running in a sandbox, they still have to break out of the
|
|
sandbox.
|
|
The more layers the attacker must break through, the lower the
|
|
likelihood of his success.
|
|
Root holes have historically been found in
|
|
virtually every server ever run as root, including basic system servers.
|
|
If you are running a machine through which people only log in via
|
|
.Xr sshd 8
|
|
and never log in via
|
|
.Xr telnetd 8
|
|
then turn off those services!
|
|
.Pp
|
|
.Fx
|
|
now defaults to running
|
|
.Xr talkd 8 ,
|
|
.Xr comsat 8 ,
|
|
and
|
|
.Xr fingerd 8
|
|
in a sandbox.
|
|
Depending on whether you
|
|
are installing a new system or upgrading an existing system, the special
|
|
user accounts used by these sandboxes may not be installed.
|
|
The prudent
|
|
sysadmin would research and implement sandboxes for servers whenever possible.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
There are a number of other servers that typically do not run in sandboxes:
|
|
.Xr sendmail 8 ,
|
|
.Xr popper 8 ,
|
|
.Xr imapd 8 ,
|
|
.Xr ftpd 8 ,
|
|
and others.
|
|
There are alternatives to
|
|
some of these, but installing them may require more work than you are willing
|
|
to put
|
|
(the convenience factor strikes again).
|
|
You may have to run these
|
|
servers as root and rely on other mechanisms to detect break-ins that might
|
|
occur through them.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
The other big potential root hole in a system are the SUID-root and SGID
|
|
binaries installed on the system.
|
|
Most of these binaries, such as
|
|
.Xr su 1 ,
|
|
reside in
|
|
.Pa /bin , /sbin , /usr/bin ,
|
|
or
|
|
.Pa /usr/sbin .
|
|
While nothing is 100% safe,
|
|
the system-default SUID and SGID binaries can be considered reasonably safe.
|
|
Still, root holes are occasionally found in these binaries.
|
|
A root hole
|
|
was found in Xlib in 1998 that made
|
|
.Xr xterm 1 Pq Pa ports/x11/xterm
|
|
(which is typically SUID)
|
|
vulnerable.
|
|
It is better to be safe than sorry and the prudent sysadmin will restrict SUID
|
|
binaries that only staff should run to a special group that only staff can
|
|
access, and get rid of
|
|
.Pq Dq Li "chmod 000"
|
|
any SUID binaries that nobody uses.
|
|
A server with no display generally does not need an
|
|
.Xr xterm 1
|
|
binary.
|
|
SGID binaries can be almost as dangerous.
|
|
If an intruder can break an SGID-kmem binary the
|
|
intruder might be able to read
|
|
.Pa /dev/kmem
|
|
and thus read the crypted password
|
|
file, potentially compromising any passworded account.
|
|
Alternatively an
|
|
intruder who breaks group
|
|
.Dq Li kmem
|
|
can monitor keystrokes sent through PTYs,
|
|
including PTYs used by users who log in through secure methods.
|
|
An intruder
|
|
that breaks the
|
|
.Dq Li tty
|
|
group can write to almost any user's TTY.
|
|
If a user
|
|
is running a terminal
|
|
program or emulator with a keyboard-simulation feature, the intruder can
|
|
potentially
|
|
generate a data stream that causes the user's terminal to echo a command, which
|
|
is then run as that user.
|
|
.Sh SECURING USER ACCOUNTS
|
|
User accounts are usually the most difficult to secure.
|
|
While you can impose
|
|
draconian access restrictions on your staff and *-out their passwords, you
|
|
may not be able to do so with any general user accounts you might have.
|
|
If
|
|
you do have sufficient control then you may win out and be able to secure the
|
|
user accounts properly.
|
|
If not, you simply have to be more vigilant in your
|
|
monitoring of those accounts.
|
|
Use of SSH and Kerberos for user accounts is
|
|
more problematic due to the extra administration and technical support
|
|
required, but still a very good solution compared to a crypted password
|
|
file.
|
|
.Sh SECURING THE PASSWORD FILE
|
|
The only sure fire way is to *-out as many passwords as you can and
|
|
use SSH or Kerberos for access to those accounts.
|
|
Even though the
|
|
crypted password file
|
|
.Pq Pa /etc/spwd.db
|
|
can only be read by root, it may
|
|
be possible for an intruder to obtain read access to that file even if the
|
|
attacker cannot obtain root-write access.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
Your security scripts should always check for and report changes to
|
|
the password file
|
|
(see
|
|
.Sx CHECKING FILE INTEGRITY
|
|
below).
|
|
.Sh SECURING THE KERNEL CORE, RAW DEVICES, AND FILE SYSTEMS
|
|
If an attacker breaks root he can do just about anything, but there
|
|
are certain conveniences.
|
|
For example, most modern kernels have a packet sniffing device driver built in.
|
|
Under
|
|
.Fx
|
|
it is called
|
|
the
|
|
.Xr bpf 4
|
|
device.
|
|
An intruder will commonly attempt to run a packet sniffer
|
|
on a compromised machine.
|
|
You do not need to give the intruder the
|
|
capability and most systems should not have the
|
|
.Xr bpf 4
|
|
device compiled in.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
But even if you turn off the
|
|
.Xr bpf 4
|
|
device, you still have
|
|
.Pa /dev/mem
|
|
and
|
|
.Pa /dev/kmem
|
|
to worry about.
|
|
For that matter,
|
|
the intruder can still write to raw disk devices.
|
|
Also, there is another kernel feature called the module loader,
|
|
.Xr kldload 8 .
|
|
An enterprising intruder can use a KLD module to install
|
|
his own
|
|
.Xr bpf 4
|
|
device or other sniffing device on a running kernel.
|
|
To avoid these problems you have to run
|
|
the kernel at a higher security level, at least level 1.
|
|
The security level can be set with a
|
|
.Xr sysctl 8
|
|
on the
|
|
.Va kern.securelevel
|
|
variable.
|
|
Once you have
|
|
set the security level to 1, write access to raw devices will be denied and
|
|
special
|
|
.Xr chflags 1
|
|
flags, such as
|
|
.Cm schg ,
|
|
will be enforced.
|
|
You must also ensure
|
|
that the
|
|
.Cm schg
|
|
flag is set on critical startup binaries, directories, and
|
|
script files \(em everything that gets run
|
|
up to the point where the security level is set.
|
|
This might be overdoing it, and upgrading the system is much more
|
|
difficult when you operate at a higher security level.
|
|
You may compromise and
|
|
run the system at a higher security level but not set the
|
|
.Cm schg
|
|
flag for every
|
|
system file and directory under the sun.
|
|
Another possibility is to simply
|
|
mount
|
|
.Pa /
|
|
and
|
|
.Pa /usr
|
|
read-only.
|
|
It should be noted that being too draconian in
|
|
what you attempt to protect may prevent the all-important detection of an
|
|
intrusion.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
The kernel runs with five different security levels.
|
|
Any super-user process can raise the level, but no process
|
|
can lower it.
|
|
The security levels are:
|
|
.Bl -tag -width flag
|
|
.It Ic -1
|
|
Permanently insecure mode \- always run the system in insecure mode.
|
|
This is the default initial value.
|
|
.It Ic 0
|
|
Insecure mode \- immutable and append-only flags may be turned off.
|
|
All devices may be read or written subject to their permissions.
|
|
.It Ic 1
|
|
Secure mode \- the system immutable and system append-only flags may not
|
|
be turned off;
|
|
disks for mounted file systems,
|
|
.Pa /dev/mem
|
|
and
|
|
.Pa /dev/kmem
|
|
may not be opened for writing;
|
|
.Pa /dev/io
|
|
(if your platform has it) may not be opened at all;
|
|
kernel modules (see
|
|
.Xr kld 4 )
|
|
may not be loaded or unloaded.
|
|
The kernel debugger may not be entered using the
|
|
.Va debug.kdb.enter
|
|
sysctl.
|
|
A panic or trap cannot be forced using the
|
|
.Va debug.kdb.panic
|
|
and other sysctl's.
|
|
.It Ic 2
|
|
Highly secure mode \- same as secure mode, plus disks may not be
|
|
opened for writing (except by
|
|
.Xr mount 2 )
|
|
whether mounted or not.
|
|
This level precludes tampering with file systems by unmounting them,
|
|
but also inhibits running
|
|
.Xr newfs 8
|
|
while the system is multi-user.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
In addition, kernel time changes are restricted to less than or equal to one
|
|
second.
|
|
Attempts to change the time by more than this will log the message
|
|
.Dq Time adjustment clamped to +1 second .
|
|
.It Ic 3
|
|
Network secure mode \- same as highly secure mode, plus
|
|
IP packet filter rules (see
|
|
.Xr ipfw 8 ,
|
|
.Xr ipfirewall 4
|
|
and
|
|
.Xr pfctl 8 )
|
|
cannot be changed and
|
|
.Xr dummynet 4
|
|
or
|
|
.Xr pf 4
|
|
configuration cannot be adjusted.
|
|
.El
|
|
.Pp
|
|
The security level can be configured with variables documented in
|
|
.Xr rc.conf 5 .
|
|
.Sh CHECKING FILE INTEGRITY: BINARIES, CONFIG FILES, ETC
|
|
When it comes right down to it, you can only protect your core system
|
|
configuration and control files so much before the convenience factor
|
|
rears its ugly head.
|
|
For example, using
|
|
.Xr chflags 1
|
|
to set the
|
|
.Cm schg
|
|
bit on most of the files in
|
|
.Pa /
|
|
and
|
|
.Pa /usr
|
|
is probably counterproductive because
|
|
while it may protect the files, it also closes a detection window.
|
|
The
|
|
last layer of your security onion is perhaps the most important \(em detection.
|
|
The rest of your security is pretty much useless (or, worse, presents you with
|
|
a false sense of safety) if you cannot detect potential incursions.
|
|
Half
|
|
the job of the onion is to slow down the attacker rather than stop him
|
|
in order to give the detection layer a chance to catch him in
|
|
the act.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
The best way to detect an incursion is to look for modified, missing, or
|
|
unexpected files.
|
|
The best
|
|
way to look for modified files is from another (often centralized)
|
|
limited-access system.
|
|
Writing your security scripts on the extra-secure limited-access system
|
|
makes them mostly invisible to potential attackers, and this is important.
|
|
In order to take maximum advantage you generally have to give the
|
|
limited-access box significant access to the other machines in the business,
|
|
usually either by doing a read-only NFS export of the other machines to the
|
|
limited-access box, or by setting up SSH keypairs to allow the limit-access
|
|
box to SSH to the other machines.
|
|
Except for its network traffic, NFS is
|
|
the least visible method \(em allowing you to monitor the file systems on each
|
|
client box virtually undetected.
|
|
If your
|
|
limited-access server is connected to the client boxes through a switch,
|
|
the NFS method is often the better choice.
|
|
If your limited-access server
|
|
is connected to the client boxes through a hub or through several layers
|
|
of routing, the NFS method may be too insecure (network-wise) and using SSH
|
|
may be the better choice even with the audit-trail tracks that SSH lays.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
Once you give a limit-access box at least read access to the client systems
|
|
it is supposed to monitor, you must write scripts to do the actual
|
|
monitoring.
|
|
Given an NFS mount, you can write scripts out of simple system
|
|
utilities such as
|
|
.Xr find 1
|
|
and
|
|
.Xr md5 1 .
|
|
It is best to physically
|
|
.Xr md5 1
|
|
the client-box files boxes at least once a
|
|
day, and to test control files such as those found in
|
|
.Pa /etc
|
|
and
|
|
.Pa /usr/local/etc
|
|
even more often.
|
|
When mismatches are found relative to the base MD5
|
|
information the limited-access machine knows is valid, it should scream at
|
|
a sysadmin to go check it out.
|
|
A good security script will also check for
|
|
inappropriate SUID binaries and for new or deleted files on system partitions
|
|
such as
|
|
.Pa /
|
|
and
|
|
.Pa /usr .
|
|
.Pp
|
|
When using SSH rather than NFS, writing the security script is much more
|
|
difficult.
|
|
You essentially have to
|
|
.Xr scp 1
|
|
the scripts to the client box in order to run them, making them visible, and
|
|
for safety you also need to
|
|
.Xr scp 1
|
|
the binaries (such as
|
|
.Xr find 1 )
|
|
that those scripts use.
|
|
The
|
|
.Xr sshd 8
|
|
daemon on the client box may already be compromised.
|
|
All in all,
|
|
using SSH may be necessary when running over unsecure links, but it is also a
|
|
lot harder to deal with.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
A good security script will also check for changes to user and staff members
|
|
access configuration files:
|
|
.Pa .rhosts , .shosts , .ssh/authorized_keys
|
|
and so forth, files that might fall outside the purview of the MD5 check.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
If you have a huge amount of user disk space it may take too long to run
|
|
through every file on those partitions.
|
|
In this case, setting mount
|
|
flags to disallow SUID binaries on those partitions is a good
|
|
idea.
|
|
The
|
|
.Cm nosuid
|
|
option
|
|
(see
|
|
.Xr mount 8 )
|
|
is what you want to look into.
|
|
I would scan them anyway at least once a
|
|
week, since the object of this layer is to detect a break-in whether or
|
|
not the break-in is effective.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
Process accounting
|
|
(see
|
|
.Xr accton 8 )
|
|
is a relatively low-overhead feature of
|
|
the operating system which I recommend using as a post-break-in evaluation
|
|
mechanism.
|
|
It is especially useful in tracking down how an intruder has
|
|
actually broken into a system, assuming the file is still intact after
|
|
the break-in occurs.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
Finally, security scripts should process the log files and the logs themselves
|
|
should be generated in as secure a manner as possible \(em remote syslog can be
|
|
very useful.
|
|
An intruder tries to cover his tracks, and log files are critical
|
|
to the sysadmin trying to track down the time and method of the initial
|
|
break-in.
|
|
One way to keep a permanent record of the log files is to run
|
|
the system console to a serial port and collect the information on a
|
|
continuing basis through a secure machine monitoring the consoles.
|
|
.Sh PARANOIA
|
|
A little paranoia never hurts.
|
|
As a rule, a sysadmin can add any number
|
|
of security features as long as they do not affect convenience, and
|
|
can add security features that do affect convenience with some added
|
|
thought.
|
|
Even more importantly, a security administrator should mix it up
|
|
a bit \(em if you use recommendations such as those given by this manual
|
|
page verbatim, you give away your methodologies to the prospective
|
|
attacker who also has access to this manual page.
|
|
.Sh SPECIAL SECTION ON DoS ATTACKS
|
|
This section covers Denial of Service attacks.
|
|
A DoS attack is typically a packet attack.
|
|
While there is not much you can do about modern spoofed
|
|
packet attacks that saturate your network, you can generally limit the damage
|
|
by ensuring that the attacks cannot take down your servers.
|
|
.Bl -enum -offset indent
|
|
.It
|
|
Limiting server forks
|
|
.It
|
|
Limiting springboard attacks (ICMP response attacks, ping broadcast, etc.)
|
|
.It
|
|
Kernel Route Cache
|
|
.El
|
|
.Pp
|
|
A common DoS attack is against a forking server that attempts to cause the
|
|
server to eat processes, file descriptors, and memory until the machine
|
|
dies.
|
|
The
|
|
.Xr inetd 8
|
|
server
|
|
has several options to limit this sort of attack.
|
|
It should be noted that while it is possible to prevent a machine from going
|
|
down it is not generally possible to prevent a service from being disrupted
|
|
by the attack.
|
|
Read the
|
|
.Xr inetd 8
|
|
manual page carefully and pay specific attention
|
|
to the
|
|
.Fl c , C ,
|
|
and
|
|
.Fl R
|
|
options.
|
|
Note that spoofed-IP attacks will circumvent
|
|
the
|
|
.Fl C
|
|
option to
|
|
.Xr inetd 8 ,
|
|
so typically a combination of options must be used.
|
|
Some standalone servers have self-fork-limitation parameters.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
The
|
|
.Xr sendmail 8
|
|
daemon has its
|
|
.Fl OMaxDaemonChildren
|
|
option which tends to work much
|
|
better than trying to use
|
|
.Xr sendmail 8 Ns 's
|
|
load limiting options due to the
|
|
load lag.
|
|
You should specify a
|
|
.Va MaxDaemonChildren
|
|
parameter when you start
|
|
.Xr sendmail 8
|
|
high enough to handle your expected load but not so high that the
|
|
computer cannot handle that number of
|
|
.Nm sendmail Ns 's
|
|
without falling on its face.
|
|
It is also prudent to run
|
|
.Xr sendmail 8
|
|
in
|
|
.Dq queued
|
|
mode
|
|
.Pq Fl ODeliveryMode=queued
|
|
and to run the daemon
|
|
.Pq Dq Nm sendmail Fl bd
|
|
separate from the queue-runs
|
|
.Pq Dq Nm sendmail Fl q15m .
|
|
If you still want real-time delivery you can run the queue
|
|
at a much lower interval, such as
|
|
.Fl q1m ,
|
|
but be sure to specify a reasonable
|
|
.Va MaxDaemonChildren
|
|
option for that
|
|
.Xr sendmail 8
|
|
to prevent cascade failures.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
The
|
|
.Xr syslogd 8
|
|
daemon can be attacked directly and it is strongly recommended that you use
|
|
the
|
|
.Fl s
|
|
option whenever possible, and the
|
|
.Fl a
|
|
option otherwise.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
You should also be fairly careful
|
|
with connect-back services such as tcpwrapper's reverse-identd, which can
|
|
be attacked directly.
|
|
You generally do not want to use the reverse-ident
|
|
feature of tcpwrappers for this reason.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
It is a very good idea to protect internal services from external access
|
|
by firewalling them off at your border routers.
|
|
The idea here is to prevent
|
|
saturation attacks from outside your LAN, not so much to protect internal
|
|
services from network-based root compromise.
|
|
Always configure an exclusive
|
|
firewall, i.e.,
|
|
.So
|
|
firewall everything
|
|
.Em except
|
|
ports A, B, C, D, and M-Z
|
|
.Sc .
|
|
This
|
|
way you can firewall off all of your low ports except for certain specific
|
|
services such as
|
|
.Xr talkd 8 ,
|
|
.Xr sendmail 8 ,
|
|
and other internet-accessible services.
|
|
If you try to configure the firewall the other
|
|
way \(em as an inclusive or permissive firewall, there is a good chance that you
|
|
will forget to
|
|
.Dq close
|
|
a couple of services or that you will add a new internal
|
|
service and forget to update the firewall.
|
|
You can still open up the
|
|
high-numbered port range on the firewall to allow permissive-like operation
|
|
without compromising your low ports.
|
|
Also take note that
|
|
.Fx
|
|
allows you to
|
|
control the range of port numbers used for dynamic binding via the various
|
|
.Va net.inet.ip.portrange
|
|
sysctl's
|
|
.Pq Dq Li "sysctl net.inet.ip.portrange" ,
|
|
which can also
|
|
ease the complexity of your firewall's configuration.
|
|
I usually use a normal
|
|
first/last range of 4000 to 5000, and a hiport range of 49152 to 65535, then
|
|
block everything under 4000 off in my firewall
|
|
(except for certain specific
|
|
internet-accessible ports, of course).
|
|
.Pp
|
|
Another common DoS attack is called a springboard attack \(em to attack a server
|
|
in a manner that causes the server to generate responses which then overload
|
|
the server, the local network, or some other machine.
|
|
The most common attack
|
|
of this nature is the ICMP PING BROADCAST attack.
|
|
The attacker spoofs ping
|
|
packets sent to your LAN's broadcast address with the source IP address set
|
|
to the actual machine they wish to attack.
|
|
If your border routers are not
|
|
configured to stomp on ping's to broadcast addresses, your LAN winds up
|
|
generating sufficient responses to the spoofed source address to saturate the
|
|
victim, especially when the attacker uses the same trick on several dozen
|
|
broadcast addresses over several dozen different networks at once.
|
|
Broadcast attacks of over a hundred and twenty megabits have been measured.
|
|
A second common springboard attack is against the ICMP error reporting system.
|
|
By
|
|
constructing packets that generate ICMP error responses, an attacker can
|
|
saturate a server's incoming network and cause the server to saturate its
|
|
outgoing network with ICMP responses.
|
|
This type of attack can also crash the
|
|
server by running it out of
|
|
.Vt mbuf Ns 's ,
|
|
especially if the server cannot drain the
|
|
ICMP responses it generates fast enough.
|
|
The
|
|
.Fx
|
|
kernel has a new kernel
|
|
compile option called
|
|
.Dv ICMP_BANDLIM
|
|
which limits the effectiveness of these
|
|
sorts of attacks.
|
|
The last major class of springboard attacks is related to
|
|
certain internal
|
|
.Xr inetd 8
|
|
services such as the UDP echo service.
|
|
An attacker
|
|
simply spoofs a UDP packet with the source address being server A's echo port,
|
|
and the destination address being server B's echo port, where server A and B
|
|
are both on your LAN.
|
|
The two servers then bounce this one packet back and
|
|
forth between each other.
|
|
The attacker can overload both servers and their
|
|
LANs simply by injecting a few packets in this manner.
|
|
Similar problems
|
|
exist with the internal chargen port.
|
|
A competent sysadmin will turn off all
|
|
of these
|
|
.Xr inetd 8 Ns -internal
|
|
test services.
|
|
.Sh ACCESS ISSUES WITH KERBEROS AND SSH
|
|
There are a few issues with both Kerberos and SSH that need to be addressed
|
|
if you intend to use them.
|
|
Kerberos5 is an excellent authentication
|
|
protocol but the kerberized
|
|
.Xr telnet 1
|
|
suck rocks.
|
|
There are bugs that make them unsuitable for dealing with binary streams.
|
|
Also, by default
|
|
Kerberos does not encrypt a session unless you use the
|
|
.Fl x
|
|
option.
|
|
SSH encrypts everything by default.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
SSH works quite well in every respect except when it is set up to
|
|
forward encryption keys.
|
|
What this means is that if you have a secure workstation holding
|
|
keys that give you access to the rest of the system, and you
|
|
.Xr ssh 1
|
|
to an
|
|
unsecure machine, your keys become exposed.
|
|
The actual keys themselves are
|
|
not exposed, but
|
|
.Xr ssh 1
|
|
installs a forwarding port for the duration of your
|
|
login and if an attacker has broken root on the unsecure machine he can utilize
|
|
that port to use your keys to gain access to any other machine that your
|
|
keys unlock.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
We recommend that you use SSH in combination with Kerberos whenever possible
|
|
for staff logins.
|
|
SSH can be compiled with Kerberos support.
|
|
This reduces
|
|
your reliance on potentially exposable SSH keys while at the same time
|
|
protecting passwords via Kerberos.
|
|
SSH keys
|
|
should only be used for automated tasks from secure machines (something
|
|
that Kerberos is unsuited to).
|
|
We also recommend that you either turn off
|
|
key-forwarding in the SSH configuration, or that you make use of the
|
|
.Va from Ns = Ns Ar IP/DOMAIN
|
|
option that SSH allows in its
|
|
.Pa authorized_keys
|
|
file to make the key only usable to entities logging in from specific
|
|
machines.
|
|
.Sh KNOBS AND TWEAKS
|
|
.Fx
|
|
provides several knobs and tweak handles that make some introspection
|
|
information access more restricted.
|
|
Some people consider this as improving system security, so the knobs are
|
|
briefly listed there, together with controls which enable some mitigations
|
|
of the hardware state leaks.
|
|
.Pp
|
|
Hardware mitigation sysctl knobs described below have been moved under
|
|
.Pa machdep.mitigations ,
|
|
with backwards-compatibility shims to accept the existing names.
|
|
A future change will rationalize the sense of the individual sysctls
|
|
(so that enabled / true always indicates that the mitigation is active).
|
|
For that reason the previous names remain the canonical way to set the
|
|
mitigations, and are documented here.
|
|
Backwards compatibility shims for the interim sysctls under
|
|
.Pa machdep.mitigations
|
|
will not be added.
|
|
.Bl -tag -width security.bsd.unprivileged_proc_debug
|
|
.It Dv security.bsd.see_other_uids
|
|
Controls visibility of processes owned by different uid.
|
|
The knob directly affects the
|
|
.Dv kern.proc
|
|
sysctls filtering of data, which results in restricted output from
|
|
utilities like
|
|
.Xr ps 1 .
|
|
.It Dv security.bsd.see_other_gids
|
|
Same, for processes owned by different gid.
|
|
.It Dv security.bsd.see_jail_proc
|
|
Same, for processes belonging to a jail.
|
|
.It Dv security.bsd.conservative_signals
|
|
When enabled, unprivileged users are only allowed to send job control
|
|
and usual termination signals like
|
|
.Dv SIGKILL ,
|
|
.Dv SIGINT ,
|
|
and
|
|
.Dv SIGTERM ,
|
|
to the processes executing programs with changed uids.
|
|
.It Dv security.bsd.unprivileged_proc_debug
|
|
Controls availability of the process debugging facilities to non-root users.
|
|
See also
|
|
.Xr proccontrol 1
|
|
mode
|
|
.Dv trace .
|
|
.It Dv vm.pmap.pti
|
|
Tunable, amd64-only.
|
|
Enables mode of operation of virtual memory system where usermode page
|
|
tables are sanitized to prevent so-called Meltdown information leak on
|
|
some Intel CPUs.
|
|
By default, the system detects whether the CPU needs the workaround,
|
|
and enables it automatically.
|
|
See also
|
|
.Xr proccontrol 1
|
|
mode
|
|
.Dv kpti .
|
|
.It Dv hw.mds_disable
|
|
amd64 and i386.
|
|
Controls Microarchitectural Data Sampling hardware information leak
|
|
mitigation.
|
|
.It Dv hw.spec_store_bypass_disable
|
|
amd64 and i386.
|
|
Controls Speculative Store Bypass hardware information leak mitigation.
|
|
.It Dv hw.ibrs_disable
|
|
amd64 and i386.
|
|
Controls Indirect Branch Restricted Speculation hardware information leak
|
|
mitigation.
|
|
.It Dv machdep.syscall_ret_l1d_flush
|
|
amd64.
|
|
Controls force-flush of L1D cache on return from syscalls which report
|
|
errors other than
|
|
.Ev EEXIST ,
|
|
.Ev EAGAIN ,
|
|
.Ev EXDEV ,
|
|
.Ev ENOENT ,
|
|
.Ev ENOTCONN ,
|
|
and
|
|
.Ev EINPROGRESS .
|
|
This is mostly a paranoid setting added to prevent hypothetical exploitation
|
|
of unknown gadgets for unknown hardware issues.
|
|
The error codes exclusion list is composed of the most common errors which
|
|
typically occurs on normal system operation.
|
|
.It Dv machdep.nmi_flush_l1d_sw
|
|
amd64.
|
|
Controls force-flush of L1D cache on NMI;
|
|
this provides software assist for bhyve mitigation of L1 terminal fault
|
|
hardware information leak.
|
|
.It Dv hw.vmm.vmx.l1d_flush
|
|
amd64.
|
|
Controls the mitigation of L1 Terminal Fault in bhyve hypervisor.
|
|
.It Dv vm.pmap.allow_2m_x_ept
|
|
amd64.
|
|
Allows the use of superpages for executable mappings under the EPT
|
|
page table format used by hypervisors on Intel CPUs to map the guest
|
|
physical address space to machine physical memory.
|
|
May be disabled to work around a CPU Erratum called
|
|
Machine Check Error Avoidance on Page Size Change.
|
|
.It Dv kern.elf32.aslr.enable
|
|
Controls system-global Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) for
|
|
normal non-PIE (Position Independent Executable) 32bit binaries.
|
|
See also
|
|
.Xr proccontrol 1
|
|
mode
|
|
.Dv aslr ,
|
|
also affected by the per-image control note flag.
|
|
.It Dv kern.elf32.aslr.pie_enable
|
|
Controls system-global Address Space Layout Randomization for
|
|
position-independent (PIE) 32bit binaries.
|
|
.It Dv kern.elf32.aslr.honor_sbrk
|
|
Makes ASLR less aggressive and more compatible with old binaries
|
|
relying on the sbrk area.
|
|
.It Dv kern.elf32.aslr.aslr_stack_gap
|
|
If ASLR is enabled for a binary, a non-zero value creates a randomized
|
|
stack gap between strings and the end of the aux vector.
|
|
The value is the maximum percentage of main stack to waste on the gap.
|
|
Cannot be greater than 50, i.e., at most half of the stack.
|
|
.It Dv kern.elf64.aslr.enable
|
|
64bit binaries ASLR control.
|
|
.It Dv kern.elf64.aslr.pie_enable
|
|
64bit PIE binaries ASLR control.
|
|
.It Dv kern.elf64.aslr.honor_sbrk
|
|
64bit binaries ASLR sbrk compatibility control.
|
|
.It Dv kern.elf32.aslr.aslr_stack_gap
|
|
Controls stack gap for 64bit binaries.
|
|
.It Dv kern.elf32.nxstack
|
|
Enables non-executable stack for 32bit processes.
|
|
Enabled by default if supported by hardware and corresponding binary.
|
|
.It Dv kern.elf64.nxstack
|
|
Enables non-executable stack for 64bit processes.
|
|
.El
|
|
.Sh SEE ALSO
|
|
.Xr chflags 1 ,
|
|
.Xr find 1 ,
|
|
.Xr md5 1 ,
|
|
.Xr netstat 1 ,
|
|
.Xr openssl 1 ,
|
|
.Xr proccontrol 1 ,
|
|
.Xr ps 1 ,
|
|
.Xr ssh 1 ,
|
|
.Xr xdm 1 Pq Pa ports/x11/xorg-clients ,
|
|
.Xr group 5 ,
|
|
.Xr ttys 5 ,
|
|
.Xr accton 8 ,
|
|
.Xr init 8 ,
|
|
.Xr sshd 8 ,
|
|
.Xr sysctl 8 ,
|
|
.Xr syslogd 8 ,
|
|
.Xr vipw 8
|
|
.Sh HISTORY
|
|
The
|
|
.Nm
|
|
manual page was originally written by
|
|
.An Matthew Dillon
|
|
and first appeared
|
|
in
|
|
.Fx 3.1 ,
|
|
December 1998.
|