Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:00:39 -0400 | From | 7v5w7go9ub0o <> | Subject | Re: libmalware.so: Dazuko Linux/BSD On-Access scanning and control |
| |
Andi Kleen wrote: > 7v5w7go9ub0o <7v5w7go9ub0o@gmail.com> writes: > >> (FYI. Dazuko may have trailblazed some of the issues now under >> discussion re: libmalware.so. It has worked well for me. > > Against what exactly did it protect you? Please give a concrete example. > > -Andi >
1. This came in a few minutes ago:
Aug 13 14:56:31 tux antivir[6381]: AntiVir ALERT: [EML/FakeLink.F] /jail/tbird/root/.thunderbird/0r2957kg.default/Mail/L ocal Folders/Junk.XXX <<< Contains detection pattern of EML/FakeLink.F in EML form
2. I have not retained the logs of "suspicious scripts" in my browser, but have come across perhaps 4 blocked scripts within the last month. Admittedly at dodgy sites.
XSS attacks are platform independent, and are a significant concern.
Please note that when I say it has worked well for me, I am not saying that it has saved my bacon! :-)
1. I am referring to the mechanics of having the Kernel/userland app stop processing when it finds a malware signature or heuristic detection.
2. Am also referring to the totally manageable (IMHO) overhead.
I've mentioned my experience with Dazuko/antivir only because it may be useful to the ongoing discussion about the nature of libmalware.so.
3. I am frankly waiting for a bug to get into my upstream distribution chain - through a hijacking or some wonderful DNS prank - at which point I ..hope.. a signature or heuristic will block my root-enabled make install.
4. Again, my hope for libmalware.so/dazuko is a realtime integrity-management link.
| |