telnet section
Shawn Wells
shawn at redhat.com
Thu Aug 1 03:09:16 UTC 2013
On 7/31/13 2:24 PM, Brian Peake wrote:
> On 7/31/13 1:36 PM, "Shawn Wells"<shawn at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>> >On 7/31/13 11:31 AM, Stuart Green wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>Ah-ha!! Thanks, I was looking for the buglist actually and couldn't
>>> >>find it!
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>Glad to be aboard:)
>> >
>> >
>> >Hm. Perhaps this whole thing can be simplified.
>> >
>> >Right now we have two checks:
>> > - package_telnet-server_removed.xml
>> > - service_telnetd_disabled.xml
>> >
>> >They seem redundant, and I'm failing to find reasons against just
>> >deleting service_telnetd_disabled. There's no way telnet can be enabled
>> >if the package isn't installed, right?
>> >
>> >Is there a reason to continue maintaining both checks?
> Shawn,
> I don't think so. I believe there are other checks that have the same
> redundancy also
Everything in the 'Obsolete Services' can trivially be migrated away to
a 'uninstall' rule:
http://people.redhat.com/swells/scap-security-guide/RHEL6/output/rhel6-guide.html#item-obsolete
These would be:
- xinetd
- telnet-server
- rsh-server
- ypserv
- tftp-server
I'd wager much of the 'Base Services' fall under this too:
http://people.redhat.com/swells/scap-security-guide/RHEL6/output/rhel6-guide.html#item-base
- abrt
- acpid
- certmonger
- cgconfig
- cgred
- cpuspeed
- haldaemon
- irqbalance
- kdump
- mdmonitor
- messagebus
- netconsole
- ntpdate
- oddjobd
- portreserve
- psacct
- quota_nld
- rdisc
- rhnsd
- rhsmcertd
- saslauthd
- smartd
- sysstat
Can anyone think of why we'd want to have checks for*both* uninstall and
disabled?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/scap-security-guide/attachments/20130731/d16e550e/attachment.html>
More information about the scap-security-guide
mailing list