similar to: IPC$ share accessible with arbitrary usernames/passwords

I have a couple of Samba (2.0.7 & 2.2.0) servers I scanned with Nessus and they reported a security hole of "Possible to login to the remote host using a NULL session" I have a couple of NT servers I disabled with a registry edit. Is there a way to prevent this on the Samba servers or is it evan a valid issue? Thanks Mike

Hi Ryan, I am not authenticating to any Windows server, I just have the samba server itself set up with 3 users who an login. ...Paul Ryan Frantz wrote: >Paul, > >Are you using a Windows PDC or ADS to authenticate your Samba shares? >If so, the problem would not be with Samba, but with the authenticating >server. > >Ryan > >-----Original Message----- >From:

I run samba 2.2.8a on my openbsd 3.4 box, installed from a package. All i need is the ability to mount disks form winxp boxes so i only run smbd, at 139/tcp. I tried scanning the box with nessus, and it came up with some results that got me curious. Since i dont know very much about the smb protocol I thought i should ask here. Have searched the archives but found only old posts, concering

I'm trying to get nessus setup for doing some internal security checking. I installed the ports for nessus and nessus-plugins, and everything worked as expected. I then registered for the full feed of plugins, which got me up to over 10,000 plugins. I restarted nessus, and it didn't work at all. I am running without X11, so I'm doing batch runs. I already have nmap installed, so I

Recently, i scanned my samba4.1 server by Nessus (a vulnerability scanner tool - http://www.tenable.com/products/nessus) Nessus says that Samba4 is vulnerable to "LDAP NULL BASE Search Access" as "The remote LDAP server may disclose sensitive information." Further it says that - The remote LDAP server supports search requests with a null, or empty, base object. This allows

Hello all, I’m running Shorewall 2.2.1 on linux kernel 2.6.10 with iptables 1.2.11. I recently ran a nessus scan of my firewall from a machine outside of the firewall and the nessus report told me that there are some ports open that I did not specify to be open. The ports are 32772/udp, 123/udp, 111/tcp, 32772/udp, and 53/udp. Why are these ports open when I did NOT specify them to be open

I have dovecot running as a pop3s server on port 995 it works great with sendmail and I run nessus to check security issues nessus reports this The SSLv2 server offers 3 strong ciphers, but also 0 medium strength and 2 weak "export class" ciphers. The weak/medium ciphers may be chosen by an export-grade or badly configured client software. They only offer a limited protection against

I'm trying to get get nessus 2.2.5 to install on my centos 3.5 system. It errors out with this error: Press ENTER to continue x - Compiling the libraries x -- Configuring the sources for your system configure: error: Could not find OpenSSL and OpenSSL headers on your system **** An error occured :/ Do you want to save the compilation log to analyze what went wrong ? [y] Where should I save

Good Day All Sorry if this is a repeated email, but I need some information about how to disable SSL on a Samba4.2.2 AD domain controller as the nessus scanner is reporting the POODLE vulnerability and we are not allowed to have any of that in our environment. the nessus scan reports poodle vulnerability on all these ports: 443, 636, 3269 I had a look at previous posts but couldn't find a

We've been struggling with a problem for the past couple of days which to this point I've only gotten to be able to boil down to this: 1. Install nessus home edition (less pluggins I assume) 2. run all scans (sequentially or in parallel, doesn't seem to matter) 3. about 3 minutes in /var/log/messages will show segfaults on imap and/or pop3 imap-login[22185]: segfault at

Hi, I'm wondering if anybody could enlighten me about the effect of tracking RELENG? When the Openssh advisory came out (SA-03:12) I allowed a few days for all issues to get ironed out and then used CVSUP to rebuild my boxes with RELENG_4_7 or RELENG_4_8 (as appropriate). The advisory says that the problem with OpenSSH is fixed by 4.7-RELEASE-p16 and a 'uname -a' of one of my 4.7

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=870 Summary: Iptables cannot block outbound packets sent by Nessus Product: iptables Version: 1.4.x Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: Ubuntu Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: iptables AssignedTo: netfilter-buglog at lists.netfilter.org

I'm runninng samba 3.0.2a on a few machines, ADS security mode, domain member roles. I throw nessus at it, and it can fetch the SID and then list all of the users on the system. I view this as a security problem, is there a way to prevent this?

Hi, I'm currently at CentOS 5.8. I'm using openssl version openssl-0.9.8e-22.el5. The following vulnerability was reported by a Nessus security scan: "SSL/ TLS Renegotion Handshakes MiTm Plaintext Data Injection" As per following link, Redhat has introduced openssl-0.9.8m which fixes this specific issue:

Thanks Kelvin I'm a bit confised tho, is this patch already avaiable? if yes, what is the parameter that disable ssl into the smb.conf? Maybe the guys from Enterprise samba have already included the patch into their releases so it's just a maatter of enabling the flag. I'm using sernet-samba-4.2.2 Thanks!

Hi there, I'm unclear on this warning I got from NeWT when I scanned my Linux workstation. Could someone clarify for me if I should be worried? Thanks, ...Paul ------------------------ microsoft-ds (445/tcp) It was possible to log into the remote host using the following login/password combinations : 'administrator'/''

Thanks for the replies. The tool that we used for testing the security vulnerability is "Nessus". I have glibc version 2.17-78.el7, I saw that CVE-2015-0235 (Ghost) is fixed in this version and I want to apply patch for the vulnerbailities CVE-2015-1472 & CVE-2015-1473. Can you please help me in finding the right version that has fixes for these? Thanks On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at

Hi, I have shorewall version 1.4.10g on Redhat 9 Local clients are on eth1 in subnet 192.168.3.0/24. eth0 is for the outside (over xdsl with includes a ppp0 interface). Nessus (nessusd) is installed *on the firewall* and managed trough nessus (the client or frontend) running on one of the internal machines. When I was running a scan against 194.152.181.36 I observed several entries like

Paul, Are you using Samba to authenticate then? You've created user accounts on your Linux system that map to Windows accounts and built the Samba password database using 'smbpasswd'? ry -----Original Message----- From: samba-bounces+ryanfrantz=informed-llc.com@lists.samba.org [mailto:samba-bounces+ryanfrantz=informed-llc.com@lists.samba.org] On Behalf Of Paul Bradshaw Sent:

Dear all, We're trying to use Nessus to monitor our system and we're having a hard time mapping the package versions from RedHat to CentOS in order to be able to report against CVE (vulnerability reports). After some research, we think that the mapping is as follows (using HTTPD as the example): CentOS httd-2.2.3-43.el5.centos.3 is equivalent to RedHat httpd-2.2.3-43.el5_5.3 So, it