| ▲ | zuzululu 9 hours ago |
| Ages ago I used php-nuke to manage my forum and it got hacked and I thought it would get taken seriously Seeing these CPanel hacks remind me how old these codebases are and how much more vulnerability remain |
|
| ▲ | dainiusse 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I don't agree that "old" necessarily implies vulnerability. |
| |
| ▲ | tclancy 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | As a coder who just hit 50, trust me, it does. | |
| ▲ | pixl97 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I mostly disagree on your disagreement unless the entire project was based on top security practices and good code in the first place. The vast majority of these web panels are a security nightmare. | | |
| ▲ | omnimus 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | These PHP systems be it cPanel, wordpress or PHP itself are most likely the biggest target besides windows. It's incredibly uncool stack especially here but it is running most of the "independent" small web. They cannot be that bad if they are managing to be ductape of the internet. | | |
| ▲ | Meekro 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I've done PHP development for over 20 years, including some pretty large projects. I've never had a situation where a security flaw in PHP itself forced me to scramble to patch something before it got hacked. On the other hand, for my Linux servers, I had to do that twice in the last month with CopyFail and DirtyFrag. | | |
| ▲ | diek 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | CVE-2021-21703 [0] is a similar class of bug in the PHP interpreter itself that was pretty recent https://www.sentinelone.com/vulnerability-database/cve-2021-... | | |
| ▲ | ipaddr 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | This is not a PHP language interpreter bug this is a PHP FPM bug. | | |
| ▲ | diek 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's a fair point, using 'interpreter' specifically was imprecise language on my part. My main point was php-fpm is developed by the core PHP team and is often the default in how PHP projects deploy these days, and that CVE was very similar to the recent 'fail' LPE vulnerabilities in the kernel. |
|
| |
| ▲ | ggallas 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
| |
| ▲ | dylan604 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Every time I venture in the the web server's error log, I see all of the skiddie's attempts at accessing the most common things with most of them being .php files. Lots of /wp/admin.php and /phpadmin/ type requests. Of course, none of those are available which is why the requests are in the error log. I've never paid attention, but I wonder how long (as in how little time) for a new server to come online before it starts to get probed by a skiddie. Whether they are just war dialing IPs or paying attention to new domain announcements but I'd put it on a few hours tops. | | |
| ▲ | hamburglar 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Dismissing these as script kiddie attempts is no longer correct. This is a real industry now. It’s not like the large scale actors are going to pass up a valid unpatched vector just because it’s old hat. | | | |
| ▲ | rstupek 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If you get a letsencrypt certificate it will get probed within a minute | | |
| ▲ | jmb99 an hour ago | parent [-] | | I’ve tested this recently (this post week). Had a dns entry up and pointing to an nginx server for ~12 hours, zero requests. 17 seconds after the letsencrypt cert was issued, the floodgates opened. Over a dozen of requests per second. | | |
| ▲ | walrus01 40 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I don't think it's necessarily specific to LE but rather to public certificate transparency logs. LE being free and easy to automate means it's very widely used these days, but if you theoretically go to a "pay" root CA and get a cert that covers thing.com and www.thing.com , the same probing will happen on the same time scale. |
|
| |
| ▲ | doublerabbit 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | 22 minutes. I got my new ISP with fibre. Placed my web server online. 22 minutes my honey pot got stung. |
| |
| ▲ | hvb2 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > They cannot be that bad if they are managing to be ductape of the internet. I think there are just a whole lot of tools written for them. So non devs can spin things up and click some things together. Is that safe and secure? Maybe, if the devs did their work well. But I'm positive no one reads the docs on how to configure something securely. I think the real reason is that it's very cheap to host, and always has been | |
| ▲ | ChocolateGod 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | cPanel is Perl. | | | |
| ▲ | anamexis 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | How does that follow? | | |
| ▲ | cinntaile 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | They have a big target on their back so the low hanging fruit is (mostly) gone. |
| |
| ▲ | bsder 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > They cannot be that bad if they are managing to be ductape of the internet. Oh, it very much can be that bad. Most "security" relies on the Hungry Tiger Theory of Security(tm). My system doesn't need to be "secure". My system simply needs to be more secure than yours. As long as there is an easier and/or more valuable target somewhere, I'm "secure". I don't need to outrun the hungry tiger; I only need to outrun you outrunning the hungry tiger. That theory, of course, doesn't hold anymore when there are enough tigers to simply eat everybody. And that's what AI did; it multiplied the tigers enough that they can just gorge on everything. Now, people are going to have to put in "actual security" or lose real money over and over and over. And since everybody has outsourced everything, nobody knows how to fix it quickly. The lawyers are going to have a field day. At the end, however, we'll have real security on our internet facing systems. But man, it's going to be painful for a while. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | TZubiri 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The concept of a GUI wrapper on top of the Linux ecosystem is what's broken. Not because of a fundamental limitation of that architecture, but because in practice the type of people that will use it do not want to learn or develop the necessary skills to administer it, and critical information like man pages and parameter lists are hidden. You can't take shortcuts without consequences. |
| |
| ▲ | walrus01 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Remember 'webmin'? As someone who pretty much exclusively uses debian, freebsd and openbsd for server OS work, I was also rather surprised recently to see the default web gui that comes on a new fedora install. https://cockpit-project.org/ | | |
| ▲ | mappu 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I was pleasantly surprised to learn the architecture for this - a minimal backend that does a PAM auth and gives you a shell over websocket, with only your own Linux user credentials - and then everything else (from managing files to apache to VMs) is done in frontend javascript. Keeps the server-side backend minimal and auditable. | |
| ▲ | esseph 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Also comes default on Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Rocky Linux , AlmaLinux, Oracle Linux, and SUSE. Also walrus from old, old UBNT forum? If so, hello :) |
| |
| ▲ | majicDave 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > The concept of a GUI wrapper on top of the Linux ecosystem is what's broken That is a nugget, it's so true. Wrappers in general are such an issue in software. Wrappers built on top of wrappers, this desire to abstract everything away makes things look simpler, but every layer slows things down and hides what is actually happening. Every wrapper is another layer of complexity, another hoop to jump through when you're looking for a solution to a problem. | |
| ▲ | ricardonunez 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Of course is the architecture and the creator of such a thing, isn’t the point of a tool like that for users that don’t have the tech knowledge? I have only used those systems on shared hosting, host providers are the one maintaining and should be keeping them up to date and WHM/Cpnel have plenty of customers to worry too patch holes, if they can’t then who’s fault is it, Architecture, or provider? Hope is the customers fault? | | |
| ▲ | walrus01 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | I would worry less about big shared hosting providers, who have a strong interest in patching their stuff quickly, than the market of people who get one or two dedicated servers or KVM VMs and then install cpanel on them and for the rest of the time they use it, ignore the CLI of the servers and never patch anything. There's a lot of small users of cpanel that have just a few licenses. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | doublerabbit 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Php-nuke was the hacking testing ground. Nuke was atrocious for exploitation. |
| |
| ▲ | jszymborski 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I was thinking about php-nuke I while back and it's terrible security rep. I figured it was just the regular PHP foot guns of the era, but I took a look at the code recently and boy howdy that was some truly atrocious code. I'm not security person (although perhaps security minded) and I found a million problems after a cursory glance. |
|
