hacked?

ivanhasyou · Post by **ivanhasyou** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 8:20 am

looks like emaculation's been hacked

ya3 · Post by **ya3** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 9:54 am

hahhahahha!
indeed it has been

anyways... at least they didnt do anything major...

Post by **ClockWise** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 10:30 am

It is just script kiddie stuff. Not a "hack." That involves more than just following someone else's directions.

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:22 pm

What did they do?

Jackalo · Post by **Jackalo** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 1:49 pm

Posted a news article on the main page telling us to secure the site.

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:30 pm

Not only non-malicious, but actually helpful!

Jackalo · Post by **Jackalo** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 9:08 pm

Still a smack in the face. I didn't handle the situation as no damage had been done to the databases this time around, so I'm not sure if Clockwise/MeanE banned the IP or not. I wouldn't have, as I agree with you.

Still, I wish they would've dropped us a line explaining what exploit they used so I could patch it up a little faster.

PPC_Digger · Post by **PPC_Digger** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 11:08 pm

Jackalo wrote:Still a smack in the face. I didn't handle the situation as no damage had been done to the databases this time around, so I'm not sure if Clockwise/MeanE banned the IP or not. I wouldn't have, as I agree with you.

Still, I wish they would've dropped us a line explaining what exploit they used so I could patch it up a little faster.

If Clockwise will want, i can try to hack in and, if i am successful i will tell him exactly what i did and how i did it.

BTW suddenly my posts number went down from 400+ to 228, i think that is one of the things they did (when i click on "see all posts by PPC_Digger", i see 400+, but here it says 200+).

Mac Emu · Post by **Mac Emu** » Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:34 am

We are very lucky. Recently another forum I frequent was hit by a hacker who did some damage. After a week, the forum is still down. Whoops! It just (finally) went back up again in a new format. It's apperently using phpbb now.

Here's what the home page of the forum looked like after the attack ...

Mac Emu · Post by **Mac Emu** » Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:37 am

PPC_Digger wrote:BTW suddenly my posts number went down from 400+ to 228, i think that is one of the things they did (when i click on "see all posts by PPC_Digger", i see 400+, but here it says 200+).

I'm sorry to see that. I'd be very pissed. I honestly didn't do it!

PPC_Digger · Post by **PPC_Digger** » Wed Aug 25, 2004 1:47 pm

Mac Emu wrote:
PPC_Digger wrote:BTW suddenly my posts number went down from 400+ to 228, i think that is one of the things they did (when i click on "see all posts by PPC_Digger", i see 400+, but here it says 200+).
I'm sorry to see that. I'd be very pissed. I honestly didn't do it!

Can you fix it? after all you are a site admin (or should i speak with ClockWise?)

Edited: If it is you who fixed it Mac Emu then thank you, if it is ClockWise then thank you ClockWise.

Mac Emu · Post by **Mac Emu** » Thu Aug 26, 2004 2:52 am

I didn't fix it either.

Understand that excessive posting can be annoying at times, especially if nothing new is introduced to the topic. And as this forum has a ranking system, some may feel a bit angry at seeing someone quickly going up the ranks with what may be seen without merit (quality, not quantity).

Your participation shows you only want to discuss and help here. Congratulations you Needs a Girlfriend I mean you are an Alexandre Daigle. (I'll have to look that up.)

PPC_Digger · Post by **PPC_Digger** » Thu Aug 26, 2004 3:38 pm

Mac Emu wrote:Your participation shows you only want to discuss and help here. Congratulations you Needs a Girlfriend I mean you are an Alexandre Daigle. (I'll have to look that up.)

He's a hocky player (looked it up yesterday).

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Thu Aug 26, 2004 4:06 pm

PPC_Digger wrote:
Mac Emu wrote:Your participation shows you only want to discuss and help here. Congratulations you Needs a Girlfriend I mean you are an Alexandre Daigle. (I'll have to look that up.)
He's a hocky player (looked it up yesterday).

Pretty sure he's a Canadian Hockey player.

PPC_Digger · Post by **PPC_Digger** » Thu Aug 26, 2004 6:58 pm

robojam wrote:
PPC_Digger wrote:
Mac Emu wrote:Your participation shows you only want to discuss and help here. Congratulations you Needs a Girlfriend I mean you are an Alexandre Daigle. (I'll have to look that up.)
He's a hocky player (looked it up yesterday).
Pretty sure he's a Canadian Hockey player.

I didn't say he wasn't.

BTW do you know how to compile a linux kernel that will work with pxelinux? I am having trouble compiling 2.4.27 on fedora. (it compiles ok, but pxelinux says it is invalid...)

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Thu Aug 26, 2004 7:31 pm

PPC_Digger wrote:
robojam wrote:
PPC_Digger wrote: He's a hocky player (looked it up yesterday).
Pretty sure he's a Canadian Hockey player.
I didn't say he wasn't.

BTW do you know how to compile a linux kernel that will work with pxelinux? I am having trouble compiling 2.4.27 on fedora. (it compiles ok, but pxelinux says it is invalid...)

There you go again - I wasn't questioning you, just adding to what you said. I thought you said you wouldn't argue so much?

As for compiling for pxelinux, did you compile drivers for your NIC (as opposed to compiling them as modules) and compile NFS? You can't compile either of these as modules as they are needed at boot time.

PPC_Digger · Post by **PPC_Digger** » Thu Aug 26, 2004 8:42 pm

I didn't compile any of these as modules.
The odd thing is, that I have some old red hat kernel that works (at least until it searches for a root partition).
I mean that pxelinux says it's invalid, not the kernel complains.

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Thu Aug 26, 2004 9:25 pm

PPC_Digger wrote:I didn't compile any of these as modules.
The odd thing is, that I have some old red hat kernel that works (at least until it searches for a root partition).
I mean that pxelinux says it's invalid, not the kernel complains.

I understood what you meant, but I wondered if it couldn't do a PXE boot as there was no NIC driver and therefore considered the kernel image as invalid. Can you boot Fedora with this image?

PPC_Digger · Post by **PPC_Digger** » Fri Aug 27, 2004 7:14 am

robojam wrote:
PPC_Digger wrote:I didn't compile any of these as modules.
The odd thing is, that I have some old red hat kernel that works (at least until it searches for a root partition).
I mean that pxelinux says it's invalid, not the kernel complains.
I understood what you meant, but I wondered if it couldn't do a PXE boot as there was no NIC driver and therefore considered the kernel image as invalid. Can you boot Fedora with this image?

The old red hat kernel doesn't have the driver and it did work, besides, I did include a driver in the kernel which I compiled.

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Fri Aug 27, 2004 1:52 pm

Does the new kernel boot in Fedora?

PPC_Digger · Post by **PPC_Digger** » Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:28 pm

robojam wrote:Does the new kernel boot in Fedora?

Didn't try it, since it is CoLinux.

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Fri Aug 27, 2004 3:14 pm

PPC_Digger wrote:
robojam wrote:Does the new kernel boot in Fedora?
Didn't try it, since it is CoLinux.

I'm getting a little confused here. You said you were using pxelinux, and you compiled the kernel on Fedora. Which is the Colinux?

PPC_Digger · Post by **PPC_Digger** » Fri Aug 27, 2004 4:35 pm

robojam wrote:
PPC_Digger wrote:
robojam wrote:Does the new kernel boot in Fedora?
Didn't try it, since it is CoLinux.
I'm getting a little confused here. You said you were using pxelinux, and you compiled the kernel on Fedora. Which is the Colinux?

The fedora is colinux, and i am trying to run the kernel with pxelinux on another computer.

Update: the knoppix kernel is not invalid.

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Fri Aug 27, 2004 4:42 pm

PPC_Digger wrote:
robojam wrote:
PPC_Digger wrote: Didn't try it, since it is CoLinux.
I'm getting a little confused here. You said you were using pxelinux, and you compiled the kernel on Fedora. Which is the Colinux?
The fedora is colinux, and i am trying to run the kernel with pxelinux on another computer.

Update: the knoppix kernel is not invalid.

OK, what I meant was why not set up the Fedora Colinux to boot with the kernel that you compiled. If you get the invalid message then you know there is a problem with the kernel, but if it boots (even if there are a bunch of error messages), then you know that it is the way that you are compiling it.

It just narrows things down to start, and then you can work on getting to the bottom of the problem.