Re: rkhunter showing false positives? Why .pwd.lock?

• To: "For users of Fedora Core releases" <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
• Subject: Re: rkhunter showing false positives? Why .pwd.lock?
• From: "Roger Grosswiler" <roger@xxxxxxxx>
• Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 11:54:16 +0200 (CEST)
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <874500700604110244u6b9f4662xd9dce1773edbd2fe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• References: <13726.193.223.193.103.1144736056.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <874500700604110244u6b9f4662xd9dce1773edbd2fe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Reply-to: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
• User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.6 [CVS]-0.cvs20050812.1.fc4

> Hello
> My FC4 server also reports such message.
>
> ---------------
>  /dev/.udevdb  /etc/.pwd.lock
> ---------------
> Please inspect:  /dev/.udevdb (directory)
>
> --
> Raina Otoni <ro3159@xxxxxxxxx>
>
Raina,

At the moment, i am in touch with rootkit.nl about this. I hope to get
those out for FC5 at least.

Some articles/FAQ's say, we can also whitelist some directories for rkhunter.

Roger

• References:
  • rkhunter showing false positives? Why .pwd.lock?
    • From: Roger Grosswiler
  • Re: rkhunter showing false positives? Why .pwd.lock?
    • From: Raina Otoni

• Prev by Date: Re: rkhunter showing false positives? Why .pwd.lock?
• Next by Date: toshiba M70-204
• Previous by thread: Re: rkhunter showing false positives? Why .pwd.lock?
• Next by thread: create pseudo-ttys ptya* (master) ttya* (slave)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread