I'm not the one packaging up the rpm, so I don't know how out of date
that is. I'd like Leam and you both to test against the git repository
to see if any of my recent OVAL patches fix any of these problems. That
will help me prioritize anything that's still broken.
I'll do a full run myself against the git repository in a little bit
here, but I have some uncommitted changes that might lead to different
results
Thanks,
- Maura Dailey
On 08/28/2013 02:21 PM, Robert Sanders wrote:
Maura,
I'm using the yum repos for my latest download also instead of git.
I can corroborate several of the false positives on my RHEL6 box after
locking things down with Security Blanket, and manually reviewing the
failures. There are several that need additional scrutiny. I used
SCC 3.1 GA to run the checks as it seems to give me more insight into
the results than oscap does (any suggestions on increasing the
who/what/where/how/why logging w/o having to rebuild oscap from source
appreciated).
I'd just reverted the VM where I'd done the SCC scan so I don't have
the results in front of me, but from memory :
57/58/59 - SCC was showing the line, including the correct value, then
complaining that the value didn't match what it was looking for.
Wonder if this is a case of not handling the leading '-' incorrectly?
73 - I know the RHEL5 STIG had an issue with whitespace at one point
that I'd gotten around
206-211 I don't have telnet on my box either, but I think it may be
treating the failure of finding /etc/xinetd.d/telnet as not finding
'disabled' in that file
240 I had this also, but we set the file to point to /etc/issue rather
than /etc/issue.net. The *contents* of both files are the same (the
correct banner). Perhaps the check should be checking the contents of
whatever banner is being used rather than just the setting references
the right file name?
-Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* scap-security-guide-bounces(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
[scap-security-guide-bounces(a)lists.fedorahosted.org] on behalf of leam
hall [leamhall(a)gmail.com]
*Sent:* Wednesday, August 28, 2013 2:02 PM
*To:* scap-security-guide(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
*Subject:* Re: Various False Positives?
Hey Maura!
I'm using the openscap-utils rpm and the content from the Fedorahosted
zip file.
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Maura Dailey <maura(a)eclipse.ncsc.mil
<mailto:maura@eclipse.ncsc.mil>> wrote:
On 08/28/2013 12:04 PM, leam hall wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Just ran oscap with the xml files available on the website
> (Benchmark version 0.9). Here are the issues that seem to be
> false positives. Prefix everything with "RHEL-06-000". These are
> all marked as fail but the server meets the STIG.
Stupid question, but what are you running against exactly? The RPM
or the latest git checkout? I want to make sure that if I run
this, I'm seeing the same results, and I've made a lot of changes
to OVAL checks in the git repository in the past few weeks. I'm
going to run through your list, comparing it against the OVAL checks.
> 9 rhnsd can be on if configured to Satellite server or similar
Fix text definitely implies this. It's not the only service that
implies it's allowed in certain environments, but then proceeds to
only accept a value of disabled.
> 57 ucredit
> 58 ocredit
> 59 lcredit
For the previous 3, I'd like to see the pam_cracklib.so line so I
can troubleshoot.
> 73 /etc/issue
Going back to my many many OVAL check updates, I'd like to see
your exact /etc/issue so I can debug what went wrong. If it's an
exact copy of the text from the STIG, I'll work off that.
> 98 No ipv6 installed
Do you mean it's disabled on your system, but the OVAL checks are
saying it isn't?
> 99 "
?
> 165 adjtimex
> 167 settimeofday
> 169 stime // Also, the STIG is wrong. There is no x86_64 stime
> syscall
The STIG actually says that stime is not necessary, which is kind
of a strange wording, but the suggested line in the fix text prose
is correct, at least. So far as OVAL checks go, I haven't gotten
to testing audit checks yet. Maybe this is broken. I'll check it
out once I've deciphered the OVAL check.
> 171 clock_settime
> 184-196, 200 chmod, chown, etc...
Haven't tested audit checks yet...
> 206-211 No telnet installed or turned on
These are both automated checks. Unless the package name is wrong,
I don't know why they'd give false positives.
> 240 /etc/ssh/sshd_config Banner
The OVAL check was definitely working on my system when I last
tested it.
> 271 If there are no removable partitions this is not a finding.
Working on testing this one now...
> 278 If the file permissions are more restrictive then it is not
> a finding.
> 324 No X running
Agreed, the GNOME checks need to be rewritten to have extended
definitions to exclude machines that don't have X installed.
> 326 "
?
> 346 Finding reported on umask 022
This is DEFINITELY a bug. The check section is actually pointing
to a different check. The actual check for this rule was never
written.
> 348 No vsftp installed, thus no file.
No OVAL check exists in SSG.
> 506 "hushlogin"
This one isn't in the SSG at all.
> 507 PrintLastLog
This one isn't in the SSG at all.
- Maura Dailey
>
>
> Am I confused in thinking a system in run level 3 should net need
> to worry about X/Gnome findings?
>
> Leam
>
> --
> Mind on a Mission <
http://leamhall.blogspot.com/>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> scap-security-guide mailing list
> scap-security-guide(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
<mailto:scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org>
>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide
_______________________________________________
scap-security-guide mailing list
scap-security-guide(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
<mailto:scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide
--
Mind on a Mission <
http://leamhall.blogspot.com/>
_______________________________________________
scap-security-guide mailing list
scap-security-guide(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide