From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 29 17:39:18 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B82516A403 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:39:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsd@lordcow.org) Received: from mail.uct.ac.za (mail.uct.ac.za [137.158.128.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C352313C474 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:39:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsd@lordcow.org) Received: from lhc.phy.uct.ac.za ([137.158.37.93]) by mail.uct.ac.za with esmtp (Exim 4.44 (FreeBSD)) id 1H0LhM-0005zY-Ls for stable@freebsd.org; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:39:16 +0200 Received: from lordcow by lhc.phy.uct.ac.za with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H0LhM-0000pk-LE for stable@freebsd.org; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:39:16 +0200 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:39:16 +0200 From: gareth To: stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20061229173916.GA3196@lordcow.org> Mail-Followup-To: stable@freebsd.org References: <20061228231226.GA16587@lordcow.org> <20061229155845.GA1266@lordcow.org> <45954196.9040909@saeab.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45954196.9040909@saeab.se> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Cc: Subject: Re: system breach X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:39:18 -0000 On Fri 2006-12-29 (17:25), Thomas Nystr?m wrote: > I just checked one of my servers and also found a /tmp/download > directory with the same files that you had. > > I then compared the timestamp of /tmp/download with the timestamp > of the directories in /var/db/pkg: Same. > > My conclusion is that during a portupgrade these files were written > there, directly or indirectly by portupgrade or the port itself. oh. ok. well even though that's weird behaviour from a package it's more plausible since i haven't found anything else suspicious. are the timestamps exactly the same? i have 4 packages that're 20 minutes different. which of yours are the same? or was that for all files. (since i'd like to try an reproduce it).