Ubuntu Security :: AppArmor Protect Devices And Limit Their Access To The File System?
Nov 9, 2010
This might sound really stupid, so you'll all have to excuse my lacking knowledge. I read that USB attacks get more and more common, like putting in an USB stick with a malicious autorun script on it, and it's game over. Can AppArmor protect devices and limit their access to the file system?
recently I am interesting at apparmor, and I have read some docs of it, but I have a question that how to protect apparmor itself? I mean only if gained root privilege then stop apparmor service, all the protection will no longer effect, if I hiding or remove root user then how to remodify profiles if needed that because have not enough privilege.
Is there apparmor maillist? maybe you can email me: <email removed for obvious reasons>
I was looking for a way to protect my samba server for limiting access to certain domains.Can I use the parameterhosts allow = example.comor something like that or is there another way to do the job for domains
I am trying to use apparmor to restrict my file browser, which is Thunar to only let me view the files that are in the home directory and also removable media.I tried following the apparmor sticky with no success.I created the profile and tried editing it and it either started and let me do pretty much everything or did not start at all. Would it be possible for someone to help me step by step to set up a profile for thunar that would only show the home directory and removable media.
A create an application which has to bind to port less than 1024 and must be launched under non-root user. OS: Ubuntu 10.04. Decision 1: Using a firewall to redirect packets. Problem: This decision is not good for me. I need simple way to solve the problem. Decision 2: Use CAP_NET_BIN_SERVICE. Problem: My execution file has 2,7G size. It is very big application with a lot of debug info. setcat command return an error:
I have been reading guides for a while now and so far have not found an exact solution to my problem.
I want a linux user (dave) to be able to switch to another account (patrol) without a password prompt, but dave must still be denied access to root. Patrol must also be denied root access.
In the sudoers file
Code: User_Alias Patrol=dave,john root ALL=(ALL) ALL Patrol ALL=(patrol) NOPSSWD: ALL
I'm trying to limit access to port 8443 on our server to 2 specific IP addresses. For some reason, access is still being allowed even though I drop all packets that aren't from the named IP addresses. The default policy is ACCEPT on the INPUT chain and this is how we want to keep it for various reasons I wont get into here. Here's the output from iptables -vnL
[Code]...
Note the actual IP we are using is masked here with 123.123.123.123. Until I can get everything working properly, we're only allowing access from 1 IP instead of 2. We can add the other one once it all works right. I haven't worked with iptables very much. So I'm quite confused about why packets matching the DROP criteria are still being allowed.
I have been trying to use my DS2490 USB to serial device with a Maxim .DG1921G thermocron with owfs. It is supposed to give me access to a virtual file system for the thermocrom without needing to launch owfs as root.
Code: /var/log/messages gives: Feb 8 16:22:45 norman-HP-G56-Notebook-PC kernel: [ 236.140141] usb 5-1: new full speed USB device using ohci_hcd and address 2[code]....
but if ds2490 module is loaded it works when run sudo.It seems from this that it is a lack of permissions to USB but I have tried all the methods on at http://owfs.org/index.php?page=udev etc. to overcome this and a few others but none work.I am running Ubuntu 10.10 kernel 2.6.35-22-generic #33-Ubuntu SMP
Or do you just use Ubuntu feeling safe enough without them? If you do use AppArmor and other security measures, what do you use them for? Obviously Firefox and Chrome would be two things. But what else?
I've recently been running a game server from my desktop, as well as a web page to accompany it.I use the ports 80/8123(HTTP)/5900(VNC)/50500(GAME)/5839(ADMINISTRATION).What's the best solution to protect my server from security threats? On a side note, I plan on adding a MySQL server later, but I want to keep it local only.
There is a ps3 in my house which i play with an online connection, i also download alot of stuff. so i want to limit the upload speed of the ps3 to give my downloads more speed. i have verizon fios.
I am using ubuntu 11.04 in my home desktop. Is it necessary that firewall should be active inorder to avoid hack? I heard that we will not be given static ip address, only paid one will get static ip address that can be used for web server implementation. If my system doesnt have static address then can others access my system?
is it possible some badware file were hidden and couldn't be observed in folders or removeable devices..?and how could we hidden file (like windows)..?
Does anyone know if Apparmor will work on the Ubuntu 10.04 livecd? I know there are currently issues running Apparmor on stacked filesystems with aufs. Currently a casper scripts disables Apparmor during boot up. Would be very useful if it could be run in a live session.
And restarted Firefox (even rebooted), but it doesn't seem to be working. When I open Firefox I am able to perform a "Save Page As" in locations I shouldn't be able to, like my Desktop or Pictures folder.
The following command says the Firefox process is in enforce mode:
Code:
Of the following lines, the only directory which is "rw" is /Downloads, why am I still able to write to other places?
Code:
OS: Ubuntu 10.10
Can someone with an active Firefox profile do this simple test for me? Click File -> Save As and try to save somewhere the Apparmor profile shouldn't let you, and let me know the results.
I'm trying to understand the Apparmor and would like to get FF profile from Bodhi.zazen [thank you],but I'm kinda new to Linux.Did lots of reading but missing one thing:
1.where is FF profile? I can't see any usr.lib.firefox-3.6.12 2. how do I do copy FF profile from Bodhi.zazen?
It seems that AppArmor can't be effectively used to protect read access to files from users (including roots). It is possible to create a profile for, eg, 'cat', but then the users can use 'less'.Is this true? Should use SELinux instead for this?
I have a program that generates large amounts of apparmor log messages. I'm happy to enforce restrictions on the program but I really don't want it to fill my log with messages every time it attempts to read a file.
Is there a way to let it enforce restrictions but not log denials?
i was trying to edit my firefox apparmor profile. I used aa-genprof, and accidentally closed the terminal before the program was finished. Firefox wouldn't load properly after that whenever it was enforced. I uninstalled and reinstalled the profiles, but it didn't help.Finally I deleted the files for the profile itself ... now it will not reinstall them..I marked all the apparmor packages for complete removal and then reinstalled them but it will not put the original firefox profile back in.