> Mail scares me. I had to send my LEA ID in recently via USPS. I'm hoping 
> they got it.

With how unreliable mail is, I still can't believe that we use it for anything official.

For instance, jury duty notices. Don't respond or never received it? Well, depending on the state and whether a judge is feeling crabby that day, you not responding to a notice you never got will result in a bench warrant issued for you. Imagine just going along your day and cop pulling you over and arresting you because you had a bench warrant for a notice you never received. And when that does happen, I highly doubt you'll be able to get any kind of restitution from the state or federal government over being arrested due to something being lost in the mail.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/man-says-he-didn-t-show-up-for-jury-duty-after-his-summons-arrived-over-two-months-late-metro-atlanta-mail-delays/ar-BB1oaPbX

On that note I've had the displeasure of going through jury duty and serving on a jury in Atlanta. There are so many cases and so many people called for jury duty that you're just treated like cattle.

On Thu, Jul 4, 2024, at 2:23 PM, George Toft via PLUG-discuss wrote:
> <scroll>
> 
> Regards,
> 
> George Toft
> 
> On 7/4/2024 6:50 AM, techlists@phpcoderusa.com wrote:
> > Thank you so much George!!
> >
> > Another Question.  I was a police officer in the 80's and 90's. During 
> > my tenure the bank was on the hook for any criminal acts as long as 
> > the customer was not negligent. I only dealt with this on a couple 
> > occasional.
> >
> > So If someone gets access to my online banking and I report it in a 
> > timely manner, or if someone washes one of my checks and I report it 
> > in a timely manner, is the bank on the hook or am I?
> 
> There are a ton of rules with more acronyms than the IT world has. I 
> would love to tell you what I understand, but I'd be talking out my ass.
> 
> 
> > BTW I thought going old school was the most secure.  I do not trust 
> > the Internet.  My daily driver is a Linux Box and I do not use my 
> > cellular phone for anything except to talk and read some news.  I am 
> > semiretired and have home officed for a long time.
> 
> Not sure there is any magic incantation that I can say that would put 
> you at ease, other than "Risk Analysis," "Government Regulation," "Audit 
> and Reviews," "Compliance," "Controls and Countermeasures," and "Fines." 
> We have to comply with a bazillion rules all designed to protect you, 
> the bank customer. Some regions are really strict and their governments 
> show they really care, like the EU - their rules are so restrictive. 
> Here's an example: You cannot log into a server that serves the EU if 
> Payment Card Information (PCI) is involved with the same user ID that 
> you used to log into your work station. This prevents lateral movement 
> from an insider attack should the attacker get an employee's credentials 
> or Kerberos TGT (Hey!!! It's now on-topic!!!) . This is just an example. 
> We have external inspectors and government auditors on site almost every 
> two weeks making us prove compliance with all the rules, and the bigger 
> we get, the more rules and more regulatory auditors we get to talk to. 
> We actually have two people on my team of 27 whose job used to be 
> project management, now is audit and compliance. All of this to protect you.
> 
> Let's not forget about the Security Operations Center monitoring 
> employee activities. Refer to the GTFOBins email from yesterday. I 
> documented a chained attack to get root based on that page, and the SOC 
> came knocking saying "George, we noticed suspicious activity on this 
> server and this date. Whatcha doin'?" Fortunately, I documented 
> everything and emailed it to my manager, so all I had to do was forward 
> that back to the SOC.
> 
> Mail scares me. I had to send my LEA ID in recently via USPS. I'm hoping 
> they got it.
> 
> 
> > Any suggestions are appreciated.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2024-07-03 21:48, George Toft wrote:
> >> Sorry, Kieth, I have bad news for you. You took a 30+ year leap 
> >> backwards in security.
> >>
> >> I can tell you for certain, from my bank fraud analyst friend (just 
> >> got promoted to financial crimes investigator), checks are the second 
> >> most insecure way of transferring money, first being putting the 
> >> money in the envelope. They helped the USPS bust a fraud ring who 
> >> worked in the Post Office - fraudsters were pulling checks out of 
> >> envelopes inside the local Post Office. My friend pulled out all the 
> >> details for the Postmaster General.
> >>
> >> ACH is free (for you) and secure and guaranteed by the originator as 
> >> they are on the hook to prove the identity of who initiated the 
> >> transaction and they have to pay. It's all very complicated, and I'm 
> >> not going into details here.
> >>
> >> I use ACH all the time. My physical devices have multi-layer physical 
> >> protection. Logical access control is in-place. Both have 
> >> multi-factor authentication. Password resets require multi-factor 
> >> authentication.
> >>
> >> And the DoD is worse - their systems have so many layers, it was 
> >> easier to just let my account get deleted from lack of use and 
> >> rebuilt it from scratch. I have notes that tell me screen-by-screen 
> >> what to put in each box and which ones to ignore. It's so secure, 
> >> legitimate users can't even get in... and this is just my health 
> >> insurance.
> >>
> >> Where all of this can break down - getting on topic - is with the SSH 
> >> protocol and web proxies. When you connect to a website using HTTPS 
> >> using a web proxy, your web browser uses it's cert to set up the 
> >> connection, or so it thinks. What's really happening is the proxy is 
> >> responding to the request and decrypting the message, then it forms a 
> >> new request and sends it to the bank, which believes the proxy and 
> >> sends it back. Everything gets decrypted on the proxy, so whoever has 
> >> admin access to the proxy can see everything. Kinda like opening 
> >> envelopes in the mail room :) Disclaimer: This is what some 
> >> networking guys told me in a presentation about 10 years ago.
> >>
> >> In summary, ACH is safe if you do it from home without a proxy. Of 
> >> course "safe" is relative, but it's safer than checks in the mail. 
> >> Drop into your bank and ask the branch manager, or call their 
> >> customer service and ask. They won't tell you checks are bad, but 
> >> they will steer you to ACH and tell you it's better. Break out the 
> >> Rosetta Stone and figure out what "better" means in corporate-speak. 
> >> Banks are in it to win it, and they don't offer something for free 
> >> unless they are saving money (cost avoidance) on the alternatives.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> George Toft
> >>
> >> On 7/3/2024 6:21 AM, techlists@phpcoderusa.com wrote:
> >>> <scroll>
> >>>
> >>> On 2024-07-02 18:20, George Toft via PLUG-discuss wrote:
> >>>> I work for a bank, and you would be amazed at how much security is 
> >>>> baked into the connecting your browser to their web servers. Makes 
> >>>> the NSA look like freshmen. And no, I'm not telling you who I work 
> >>>> for.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> George Toft
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to hear more.  The world is a hostile place.  I recently 
> >>> went old school.  I asked the bank to disarm my online banking.  I 
> >>> now deal with paper statements and everything gets paid by check. 
> >>> Not as convenient as on-line banking, however I am hoping it makes 
> >>> my world a little bit more secure.
> >>>
> >>> What are your thoughts?
> >>>
> >>> Keith
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 6/29/2024 5:19 PM, Keith Smith via PLUG-discuss wrote:
> >>>>> Mike,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The world is a hostile place.  The more precautions you take the 
> >>>>> better.  I cover the camera on my cellular phone while not in 
> >>>>> use.  I cover the camera that is built into my laptop while it is 
> >>>>> not in use.  I think on-line banking is dangerous.  At some point 
> >>>>> I want to turn off WIFI and go to wired only on my local net.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We lock our cars and houses for a reason.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I do not know as much security as I'd like, however it might be 
> >>>>> necessary at some point to to become more cyber.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> About 24 years ago the members of the Tucson Free Unix Group 
> >>>>> (TFUG) helped me build a server that I ran out of my home.  We 
> >>>>> left the email relay open and I got exploited. About 10 years ago 
> >>>>> I became root and I accidentally overwrote my home directory. 
> >>>>> yikes... both were painful. The first example is a reason we must 
> >>>>> be more aware of what we are doing. The 2nd is an example why we 
> >>>>> should use sudo as much as we can instead of becoming root.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Keith
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2024-06-29 08:55, Michael via PLUG-discuss wrote:
> >>>>>> I just realized, while 99% of the people on this list are honest 
> >>>>>> there
> >>>>>> is the diabolical 1%. So I guess I enter my password for the rest of
> >>>>>> my life. Or do you think that it really matters considering this is
> >>>>>> only a mailing list?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sat, Jun 29, 2024, 10:22 AM Michael <bmike1@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks for saying this. I realized that I only needed to run apt as
> >>>>>>> root. I didn't know how to make it so I could do that..... but
> >>>>>>> chatgt did!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 29, 2024, 5:53 AM Eric Oyen via PLUG-discuss
> >>>>>>> <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> NO WORRIES FROM THIS END RUSTY.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> As a general rule, I use sudo only for very specific tasks
> >>>>>>>> (usually updating my development package tree on OS X) and no
> >>>>>>>> where else will I run anything as root. I have seen what happens
> >>>>>>>> to linux machines that run infected binaries as root and it can
> >>>>>>>> get ugly pretty fast. In one case, I couldn’t take the machine
> >>>>>>>> out of service because of other items I was involved with, so I
> >>>>>>>> simply made part of the dir tree immutable after replacing a few
> >>>>>>>> files in /etc. That would fill up the system logs with an error
> >>>>>>>> message about a specific binary trying to replace a small number
> >>>>>>>> of conf files. Once the offending binary was found, it made things
> >>>>>>>> easier trying to disable it or get rid of it. However, after a
> >>>>>>>> while, I simply pulled the drive and ran it through a Dod secure
> >>>>>>>> erase and installed a newer linux bistro on it. I did use the same
> >>>>>>>> trick with chattr to make /bin, /sbin and /etc immutable. That
> >>>>>>>> last turned out to be handy as I caught someone trying to rootkit
> >>>>>>>> my machine using a known exploit, only they couldn’t get it to
> >>>>>>>> run because the binaries they wanted to replace couldn’t be
> >>>>>>>> written to. :)Yes, this would be a bit excessive, but over the
> >>>>>>>> long run, proved far less inconvenient than having to wipe and
> >>>>>>>> reinstall an OS.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -Eric
> >>>>>>>> From the central Offices of the Technomage Guild, security
> >>>>>>>> Applications Dept.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Jun 28, 2024, at 6:43 PM, Rusty Carruth via PLUG-discuss
> >>>>>>>> <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> (Deep breath.  Calm...)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I can't figure out how to respond rationally to the below, so
> >>>>>>>> all I'm going to say is - before you call troll, you might want
> >>>>>>>> to research the author, and read a bit more carefully what they
> >>>>>>>> wrote.  I don't believe I recommended any of the crazy things you
> >>>>>>>> suggest.  And I certainly didn't intend to imply any of that.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On the other hand, it may not have  been clear, so I'll just say
> >>>>>>>> "Sorry that what I wrote wasn't clear, but english isn't my first
> >>>>>>>> language.  Unfortunately its the only one I know".
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> And on that note, I'll shut up.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 6/26/24 15:05, Ryan Petris wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> I feel like you're trolling so I'm not going to spend very much
> >>>>>>>> time on this.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> It's been a generally good security practice for at least the
> >>>>>>>> last 25+ years to not regularly run as a privileged user,
> >>>>>>>> requiring some sort of escalation to do administrative-type tasks.
> >>>>>>>> By using passwordless sudo, you're taking away that escalation.
> >>>>>>>> Why not just run as root? Then you don't need sudo at all. In
> >>>>>>>> fact, why even have a password at all? Why encrypt? Why don't you
> >>>>>>>> just put all your data on a publicly accessible FTP server and
> >>>>>>>> just grab stuff when you need it? The NSA has all your data anyway
> >>>>>>>> and you don't have anything to hide so why not just leave it out
> >>>>>>>> there for the world to see?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> As for something malicious needing to be written to use sudo,
> >>>>>>>> why wouldn't it? sudo is ubiquitous on unix systems; if it didn't
> >>>>>>>> at least try then that seams like a pretty dumb malicious script
> >>>>>>>> to me.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> You also don't necessarily need to open/run something for it to
> >>>>>>>> run. IIRC there was a recent image vulnerability in Gnome's
> >>>>>>>> tracker-miner application which indexes files in your home
> >>>>>>>> directory. And before you say that wouldn't happen in KDE, it too
> >>>>>>>> has a similar program, I believe called Baloo.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> There also exists the recent doas program and the systemd
> >>>>>>>> replacement run0 to do the same.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, at 12:23 PM, Rusty Carruth via
> >>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Actually, I'd like to start a bit of a discussion on this.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> First, I know that for some reason RedHat seems to think that
> >>>>>>>> sudo is
> >>>>>>>>>>> bad/insecure.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to know the logic there, as I think the argument FOR
> >>>>>>>> using sudo
> >>>>>>>>>>> is MUCH stronger than any argument I've heard (which,
> >>>>>>>> admittedly, is
> >>>>>>>>>>> pretty close to zero) AGAINST it.   Here's my thinking:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Allowing users to become root via sudo gives you:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> - VERY fine control over what programs a user can use as root
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> - The ability to remove admin privs (ability to run as root)
> >>>>>>>> from an
> >>>>>>>>>>> individual WITHOUT having to change root password everywhere.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Now, remember, RH is supposedly 'corporate friendly'. As a
> >>>>>>>> corporation,
> >>>>>>>>>>> that 2nd feature is well worth the price of admission, PLUS I
> >>>>>>>> can only
> >>>>>>>>>>> allow certain admins to run certain programs? Very nice.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> So, for example, at my last place I allowed the 'tester' user
> >>>>>>>> to run
> >>>>>>>>>>> fdisk as root, because they needed to partition the disk under
> >>>>>>>> test.  In
> >>>>>>>>>>> my case, and since the network that we ran on was totally
> >>>>>>>> isolated from
> >>>>>>>>>>> the corporate network, I let fdisk be run without needing a
> >>>>>>>> password.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Oh, and if they messed up and fdisk'ed the boot partition, it
> >>>>>>>> was no big
> >>>>>>>>>>> deal - I could recreate the machine from scratch (minus
> >>>>>>>> whatever data
> >>>>>>>>>>> hadn't been copied off yet - which would only be their most
> >>>>>>>> recent run),
> >>>>>>>>>>> in 10 minutes (which was about 2 minutes of my time, and 8
> >>>>>>>> minutes of
> >>>>>>>>>>> scripted 'dd' ;-) However, if the test user wanted to become
> >>>>>>>> root using
> >>>>>>>>>>> su, they had to enter the test user password.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> So, back to the original question - setting sudo to not
> >>>>>>>> require a
> >>>>>>>>>>> password.  We should have asked, what program do you want to
> >>>>>>>> run as root
> >>>>>>>>>>> without requiring a password? How secure is your system? What
> >>>>>>>> else do
> >>>>>>>>>>> you use it for?  Who has access?  etc, etc, etc.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> There's one other minor objection I have to the 'zero defense'
> >>>>>>>> statement
> >>>>>>>>>>> below - the malicious thing you downloaded (and, I assume ran)
> >>>>>>>> has to be
> >>>>>>>>>>> written to USE sudo in its attempt to break in, I believe, or
> >>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't matter HOW open your sudo was. (simply saying 'su -
> >>>>>>>> myscript'
> >>>>>>>>>>> won't do it).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> And, if you're truly paranoid about stuff you download, you
> >>>>>>>> should:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1 - NEVER download something you don't have an excellent
> >>>>>>>> reason to
> >>>>>>>>>>> believe is 'safe', and ALWAYS make sure you actually
> >>>>>>>> downloaded it from
> >>>>>>>>>>> where you thought you did.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2 - For the TRULY paranoid, have a machine you use to download
> >>>>>>>> and test
> >>>>>>>>>>> software on, which you can totally disconnect from your
> >>>>>>>> network (not
> >>>>>>>>>>> JUST the internet), and which has NO confidential info, and
> >>>>>>>> which you
> >>>>>>>>>>> can erase and rebuild without caring.  Run the downloaded
> >>>>>>>> stuff there,
> >>>>>>>>>>> for a long time, until you're pretty sure it won't bite you.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3 - For the REALLY REALLY paranoid, don't download anything
> >>>>>>>> from
> >>>>>>>>>>> anywhere, disconnect from the internet permanently, get
> >>>>>>>> high-tech locks
> >>>>>>>>>>> for your doors, and wrap your house in a faraday cage!
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> And probably don't leave the house....
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The point of number 3 is that there is always a risk, even
> >>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>> 'well-known' software, and as someone else said - they're
> >>>>>>>> watching you
> >>>>>>>>>>> anyway.  The question is how 'safe' do you want to be? And how
> >>>>>>>> paranoid
> >>>>>>>>>>> are you, really?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Wow, talk about rabbit hole! ;-)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 'Let the flames begin!' :-)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 6/25/24 18:50, Ryan Petris via PLUG-discuss wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wanted sudo not to require a password.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please reconsider this... This is VERY BAD security practice.
> >>>>>>>> There's basically zero defense if you happen to download/run
> >>>>>>>> something malicious.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024, at 6:01 PM, Michael via PLUG-discuss
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> then I remember that a PLUG member mentioned ChatGPT being
> >>>>>>>> good at troubleshooting so I figured I'd give it a go. I sprint
> >>>>>>>> about half an hour asking it the wrong question but after that it
> >>>>>>>> took 2 minutes. I wanted sudo not to require a password. it is
> >>>>>>>> wonderful! now I don't have to bug you guys. so it looks like this
> >>>>>>>> is the end of the user group unless you want to talk about OT
> >>>>>>>> stuff.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- :-)~MIKE~(-:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> >>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> >>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> >>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> >>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> >>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> >>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> >>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> >>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> >>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> >>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> >>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>