From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5DB73EA08 for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 01:45:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mail@localhost) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g9D5jcE10173 for blinux-list@listman.redhat.com; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 01:45:38 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [172.16.48.31]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g9D5jcf10169 for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 01:45:38 -0400 Received: from mx1.onewest.net (root@mx1.onewest.net [199.104.81.32]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g9D5PMX10961 for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 01:25:23 -0400 Received: from id07.onewest.net ([199.104.81.25] helo=idscc07.onewest.net ident=mail) by mx1.onewest.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 180bZH-0007Z3-00 for ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 23:45:35 -0600 Received: from du119.206.onewest.net ([65.19.206.119] helo=rupin.localnet) by idscc07.onewest.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 180bZG-00034p-00 for ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 23:45:35 -0600 Received: from localhost (lcr@localhost) by rupin.localnet (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9D5jGa09271 for ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 23:45:16 -0600 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 23:45:16 -0600 (MDT) From: "L. C. Robinson" To: blinux-list@redhat.com Subject: Re: security programs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Loop: blinux-list@redhat.com Sender: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com Errors-To: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com X-BeenThere: blinux-list@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.1 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: blinux-list@redhat.com X-Reply-To: no_spam+munged_lcr@onewest.net.invalid List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux for blind general discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Well, knowing that xinetd had replaced most or all of the functionality of tcp_wrappers in recent Red Hat versions (but they still installed it by default, for some reason), I ran: rpm -q tcp_wrappers --whatrequires to find out what still uses it, and came up with nothing. Probably some server I haven't installed still needs it, or libwrap.a is needed to compile something. Anyway, as you have guessed by now, slackware probably uses xinetd too, thereby obsoleting tcp_wrappers. Alternatively, maybe slackware has a slightly different naming scheme for that package? Bottom line, look at the documentation for xinetd, assuming that is what slackware now uses, and see if you care any more about tcp_wrappers (probably not). Sorry about my error; hopefully you now have the info you need (look to xinetd for the replacement functionality). LCR On Sat, 12 Oct 2002, Jude DaShiell wrote: > By that standard, slackware 8.0.0 seems to fail. > Unless tcp_wrappers is hidden and protecting itself > from update. > On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, L. C. Robinson wrote: > > > Tcp_wrappers is a standard binary part of Red Hat, > > and any other decent distribution. It is essential > > to configure it after a new installation, for any > > decent security, of course, along with the other > > security configuration basics, such as installing > > all security updates. If one neglects those > > things, good security tools in linux are worthless, > > and you WILL get hacked (but maybe not quite so > > quickly as with a certain dominant vendor's junk > > software). > > On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Jude DaShiell wrote: > > > > > Has anyone managed to get tcp_wrappers_7.6 built > > > and operating under any version oor any brand of > > > linux yet? If you don't know what that i > > > ftp://ftp.porcupine.org/pub/security/index.html > > > should give you background info. -- L. C. Robinson reply to no_spam+munged_lcr@onewest.net.invalid People buy MicroShaft for compatibility, but get incompatibility and instability instead. This is award winning "innovation". Find out how MS holds your data hostage with "The *Lens*"; see "CyberSnare" at http://www.netaction.org/msoft/cybersnare.html