Checksums and file sizes
Don Williams
one do if a Verify Software report lists errors between what it found and
what it expected?
I think somewhere there is something called an Authentication data base, but
it seems to get out-dated over time.
DAW
Jeff Liebermann
wrote:
>Where is the master list of checksums and file sizes kept, and what should
>one do if a Verify Software report lists errors between what it found and
>what it expected?
Product and version number please?
For OSR5, try:
custom -V strict
which will verify everything including checksums.
Man page for custom.
http://docsrv.caldera.com:507/en/man/html.ADM/custom.ADM.html
>I think somewhere there is something called an Authentication data base, but
>it seems to get out-dated over time.
It's listed in here somewhere under SSO's, maybe.
http://docsrv.caldera.com:507/en/man/html.M/hierarchy.M.html
--
Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
(831)421-6491 pgr (831)336-2558 home
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS
je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us je...@cruzio.com
Don Williams
"Jeff Liebermann" <je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
news:0dl1pv8ff69nfjvsv...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 03:37:57 GMT, "Don Williams" <dwil...@san.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Where is the master list of checksums and file sizes kept, and what
should
> >one do if a Verify Software report lists errors between what it found and
> >what it expected?
>
> Product and version number please?
OSR 5.0.6
> For OSR5, try:
> custom -V strict
> which will verify everything including checksums.
>
> Man page for custom.
> http://docsrv.caldera.com:507/en/man/html.ADM/custom.ADM.html
>
> >I think somewhere there is something called an Authentication data base,
but
> >it seems to get out-dated over time.
>
> It's listed in here somewhere under SSO's, maybe.
> http://docsrv.caldera.com:507/en/man/html.M/hierarchy.M.html
I'll check that out. As it is I have a hard copy of the Verify Report -
Strict database compliance, and it lists 353 errors affecting 199 files.
One error, the mode of tcbck was fixed. All the others are either checksum
or file size errors and they are marked (not automatically fixable).
So, what to do? I think the list it is comparing to is out of date but
don't know how to fix it. The system works fine, even got the graphics
screen loading automatically and I like the editor much more than vi or
vedit. I also have the Joe editor and it's much like Wordstar but I somehow
got into the habit of using vedit for programs, usually about 2-3 hours
every day.
Thanks,
DAW
Don Williams
"Don Williams" <dwil...@san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:pA2kb.31784$ZH4....@twister.socal.rr.com...
errors manually after exiting custom or scoadmin.
O.K., but where and how?
DAW
Bela Lubkin
> > >Where is the master list of checksums and file sizes kept, and what should
> > >one do if a Verify Software report lists errors between what it found and
> > >what it expected?
> I'll check that out. As it is I have a hard copy of the Verify Report -
> Strict database compliance, and it lists 353 errors affecting 199 files.
> One error, the mode of tcbck was fixed. All the others are either checksum
> or file size errors and they are marked (not automatically fixable).
>
> So, what to do? I think the list it is comparing to is out of date but
> don't know how to fix it. [...]
Whoa, stop!
`custom -v strict` compares modified files to their original, unmodified
forms. This is something you might do if you were preparing to replace
a system (e.g. do an in-place upgrade) and wanted a list of modified
files. It is _NOT_ appropriate for a live system you intend to keep
using. custom(ADM) says:
" strict
" report all discrepancies, including expected
" discrepancies such as changed configuration files and
" missing optional files. This option can take a long
" time.
"expected discrepancies".
What you may be looking for is:
custom -V thorough
In any case, I'm sure you're barking up the wrong tree. Whatever is
still wrong with the system (and I have no idea what that is, you keep
tossing off so many different issues every time you turn around) is
going to be due to misconfiguration within a file that you're supposed
to be configuring. `custom -v strict` may find it, but you'll never be
able to figure out which of the hundreds of files it lists is the
culprit.
>Bela<
Jeff Liebermann
wrote:
>I'll check that out. As it is I have a hard copy of the Verify Report -
>Strict database compliance, and it lists 353 errors affecting 199 files.
>One error, the mode of tcbck was fixed. All the others are either checksum
>or file size errors and they are marked (not automatically fixable).
What problem are you trying to solve?
Just because the checksum database doesn't agree with
custom -V strict
doesn't mean your system is toast, compromised, or rootkited. It
means that SCO did not do a particularly exemplary job of maintaining
the checksums for updates, fixes, patches, and security updates. I
usually look at the output and manually decide what to fix. The usual
broken symlinks occupy most of my time. These are tricky as they may
be two versions of the same program or two divergent copies of the
same configuration file. I look at the permissions and ownership, and
only tweak files that are obviously wrong or insecure. Anything with
SUID and GUID gets my immediate attention. Other than that, I do
nothing and leave the rest alone.
>So, what to do? I think the list it is comparing to is out of date but
>don't know how to fix it.
Do you want to fix the checksum list or the files? What are you
trying to fix?
>The system works fine,
If it works, leave it alone. If it's not broken, you're not trying
hard enough.
>even got the graphics
>screen loading automatically and I like the editor much more than vi or
>vedit. I also have the Joe editor and it's much like Wordstar but I somehow
>got into the habit of using vedit for programs, usually about 2-3 hours
>every day.
Don Williams
"Bela Lubkin" <be...@sco.com> wrote in message
news:2003101815...@sco.com...
Answer: There is nothing wrong with my system at the moment. It's running
just fine.
My only concern was the large number of file size and checksum differences
reported when I ran that strict software system verify and got all the big
report. Apparently that's because 199 files have been changed since the
reference numbers were stored. If that's unimportant then I won't worry
about it for now.
There was a problem encountered in getting the graphics screen up, and
shortly after I got it running some of the links which supported the screen
content seem to have been lost, but the system fixed that, and everything is
ducky at the moment. My F12 screen boots up in graphics just fine now and
the editor even works.
The only thing I haven't been able to solve, and it isn't related to the OS,
is getting the Belkin Bulldog monitor to communicate over the serial port
under Open Server. It does communicate over the same port under Win XP and
it's clearly a Belkin problem which they aren't equipped to solve so all I
have to do is not leave the system up on Open Server when I leave for more
than a few minutes. I can do that under Win XP and the software will close
all programs and shut down the system.
Again, everything is just fine. I do plan to do an in-place upgrade to
5.0.7 but not immediately. Maybe I should be concerned then.
Thanks,
DAW
Don Williams
Jeff, at some point I would like to fix the list since the files seem O.K.
and the system is running.
As I said above, I think the list is out of date because of file changes.
That's why I was asking where the list is stored and how it could be edited.
For now everything is great, as indicated above so I'll leave things as they
are.
DAW
Bela Lubkin
> "Jeff Liebermann" <je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
> news:0hp2pvsodh46p9b50...@4ax.com...
> > What problem are you trying to solve?
> >
> > Just because the checksum database doesn't agree with
> > custom -V strict
> > doesn't mean your system is toast, compromised, or rootkited. It
> > means that SCO did not do a particularly exemplary job of maintaining
> > the checksums for updates, fixes, patches, and security updates. I
> > usually look at the output and manually decide what to fix. The usual
> > broken symlinks occupy most of my time. These are tricky as they may
> > be two versions of the same program or two divergent copies of the
> > same configuration file. I look at the permissions and ownership, and
> > only tweak files that are obviously wrong or insecure. Anything with
> > SUID and GUID gets my immediate attention. Other than that, I do
> > nothing and leave the rest alone.
> >
> > >So, what to do? I think the list it is comparing to is out of date but
> > >don't know how to fix it.
> >
> > Do you want to fix the checksum list or the files? What are you
> > trying to fix?
> >
> > >The system works fine,
> >
> > If it works, leave it alone. If it's not broken, you're not trying
> > hard enough.
> Jeff, at some point I would like to fix the list since the files seem O.K.
> and the system is running.
>
> As I said above, I think the list is out of date because of file changes.
> That's why I was asking where the list is stored and how it could be edited.
>
> For now everything is great, as indicated above so I'll leave things as they
> are.
Let me try to explain this again...
`custom -V strict` compares your system's _modified_ files to the
_original_ files shipped with the distribution. It's _supposed_ to
point out files that you've changed. You could use this if, for
instance, you were going to install a completely new system and wanted
to manually copy over (or compare) the files you had changed on the old
system. It is the wrong tool to use if you want to ask "which files
have unexpected (anomalous) changes?"
`custom -V thorough` is the command you're looking for. Even so, do not
blindly try to follow its output as if it were 100% correct. Every
release of OpenServer 5.0.x has had a number of symlink breaks, files
which were mistakenly listed as non-changable when in fact they were
changable, files whose ownership or permissions are naturally changable,
and things like that. The "thorough" output is a reasonable guide to
look through. It is not gospel.
>Bela<