rpm -V verify purposerpm -Vf doesn't report a changed fileHow can I verify that a PGP key is imported into RPM?rpm --upgrade not upgrading?RPM package naming conventionRPM subpackage nameHow to verify the RPM database?How to verify one file of a package, not the RPM itselfRPM command stuck/FREEZE when installing RPM filerpm --verify does not inform about missing fileBuild “shadow” RPM database?rpm mock - complex rpm building

What is the command to reset a PC without deleting any files

Crop image to path created in TikZ?

Could a US political party gain complete control over the government by removing checks & balances?

What happens when a metallic dragon and a chromatic dragon mate?

Is it legal to have the "// (c) 2019 John Smith" header in all files when there are hundreds of contributors?

What do the Banks children have against barley water?

Is a vector space a subspace of itself?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of running one shots compared to campaigns?

How can I fix this gap between bookcases I made?

How can I add custom success page

Can a planet have a different gravitational pull depending on its location in orbit around its sun?

Can I find out the caloric content of bread by dehydrating it?

When blogging recipes, how can I support both readers who want the narrative/journey and ones who want the printer-friendly recipe?

New order #4: World

How to answer pointed "are you quitting" questioning when I don't want them to suspect

What to wear for invited talk in Canada

Where else does the Shulchan Aruch quote an authority by name?

Calculate Levenshtein distance between two strings in Python

Copycat chess is back

"listening to me about as much as you're listening to this pole here"

Extreme, but not acceptable situation and I can't start the work tomorrow morning

Why is my log file so massive? 22gb. I am running log backups

COUNT(*) or MAX(id) - which is faster?

Is every set a filtered colimit of finite sets?



rpm -V verify purpose


rpm -Vf doesn't report a changed fileHow can I verify that a PGP key is imported into RPM?rpm --upgrade not upgrading?RPM package naming conventionRPM subpackage nameHow to verify the RPM database?How to verify one file of a package, not the RPM itselfRPM command stuck/FREEZE when installing RPM filerpm --verify does not inform about missing fileBuild “shadow” RPM database?rpm mock - complex rpm building






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








2















I am told I should do rpm -Va because:



operating system must be configured so that the cryptographic hash of system files and commands matches vendor values... Without cryptographic integrity protections, system command and files can be altered by unauthorized users without detection



So a rpm -Va | grep '^..5' is done and if anything comes back that is supposed to be a problem.



From a clean install from DVD I can successfully meet that criteria.



However, I am also told to configure files such as /etc/ssh/sshd_config and /etc/audit/audit.rules not to mention some obvious other ones to make a system functional, and changing these of course results in these files not matching vendor values, thus the rpm -Va comes back with mainly S.5....T



Can someone explain the purpose or rationale of this? As well as how grep '^..5' is supposed to work? Is there a way to make this work such that -- yeah, I changed a .conf file, but have rpm be updated to not flag specified packages as having been altered?










share|improve this question






























    2















    I am told I should do rpm -Va because:



    operating system must be configured so that the cryptographic hash of system files and commands matches vendor values... Without cryptographic integrity protections, system command and files can be altered by unauthorized users without detection



    So a rpm -Va | grep '^..5' is done and if anything comes back that is supposed to be a problem.



    From a clean install from DVD I can successfully meet that criteria.



    However, I am also told to configure files such as /etc/ssh/sshd_config and /etc/audit/audit.rules not to mention some obvious other ones to make a system functional, and changing these of course results in these files not matching vendor values, thus the rpm -Va comes back with mainly S.5....T



    Can someone explain the purpose or rationale of this? As well as how grep '^..5' is supposed to work? Is there a way to make this work such that -- yeah, I changed a .conf file, but have rpm be updated to not flag specified packages as having been altered?










    share|improve this question


























      2












      2








      2








      I am told I should do rpm -Va because:



      operating system must be configured so that the cryptographic hash of system files and commands matches vendor values... Without cryptographic integrity protections, system command and files can be altered by unauthorized users without detection



      So a rpm -Va | grep '^..5' is done and if anything comes back that is supposed to be a problem.



      From a clean install from DVD I can successfully meet that criteria.



      However, I am also told to configure files such as /etc/ssh/sshd_config and /etc/audit/audit.rules not to mention some obvious other ones to make a system functional, and changing these of course results in these files not matching vendor values, thus the rpm -Va comes back with mainly S.5....T



      Can someone explain the purpose or rationale of this? As well as how grep '^..5' is supposed to work? Is there a way to make this work such that -- yeah, I changed a .conf file, but have rpm be updated to not flag specified packages as having been altered?










      share|improve this question
















      I am told I should do rpm -Va because:



      operating system must be configured so that the cryptographic hash of system files and commands matches vendor values... Without cryptographic integrity protections, system command and files can be altered by unauthorized users without detection



      So a rpm -Va | grep '^..5' is done and if anything comes back that is supposed to be a problem.



      From a clean install from DVD I can successfully meet that criteria.



      However, I am also told to configure files such as /etc/ssh/sshd_config and /etc/audit/audit.rules not to mention some obvious other ones to make a system functional, and changing these of course results in these files not matching vendor values, thus the rpm -Va comes back with mainly S.5....T



      Can someone explain the purpose or rationale of this? As well as how grep '^..5' is supposed to work? Is there a way to make this work such that -- yeah, I changed a .conf file, but have rpm be updated to not flag specified packages as having been altered?







      security rpm






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Mar 28 at 19:22









      Jeff Schaller

      44.7k1163145




      44.7k1163145










      asked Mar 28 at 17:58









      ronron

      1,1802818




      1,1802818




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1














          To take the easy part first, the grep '^..5 portion investigates the output for lines that start with any two characters followed by a 5. That 5 represents (from man rpm):




          5 digest (formerly MD5 sum) differs




          as a fairly good indicator that the corresponding file has changed.



          Next, I would encourage any rpm -Va | grep ... investigation to ignore config files. These are files, like you point out, that are intended to be changed by the system administrator. Luckily, they are indicated in the rpm -Va output with a c marker:




          The format of the output is a string of 9 characters, a possible attribute marker:



          c %config configuration file.
          d %doc documentation file.
          g %ghost file (i.e. the file contents are not included in the package payload).
          l %license license file.
          r %readme readme file.


          from the package header, followed by the file name.




          ... so I would consider something along the lines of:



          sudo rpm -Va | awk '/^..5/ && $2 != "c"'


          ... which ties together the grep ^..5 idea along with ignoring files that are classified as configuration files. Alternatively, you could capture every flagged line of output and then "whitelist" config files where you've accepted the risk of change -- then, you're alerted when a presumed-static config file changes.



          Without repackaging the RPM's, I do not know of a way to update the digest in the RPM database to indicate that you've changed a config file, which is why I suggest the above workarounds.






          share|improve this answer























          • I've just discovered meuh's answer here which goes into more detail regarding an RPM being able to exclude certain files from future verification.

            – Jeff Schaller
            Mar 28 at 19:32











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "106"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f509282%2frpm-v-verify-purpose%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          1














          To take the easy part first, the grep '^..5 portion investigates the output for lines that start with any two characters followed by a 5. That 5 represents (from man rpm):




          5 digest (formerly MD5 sum) differs




          as a fairly good indicator that the corresponding file has changed.



          Next, I would encourage any rpm -Va | grep ... investigation to ignore config files. These are files, like you point out, that are intended to be changed by the system administrator. Luckily, they are indicated in the rpm -Va output with a c marker:




          The format of the output is a string of 9 characters, a possible attribute marker:



          c %config configuration file.
          d %doc documentation file.
          g %ghost file (i.e. the file contents are not included in the package payload).
          l %license license file.
          r %readme readme file.


          from the package header, followed by the file name.




          ... so I would consider something along the lines of:



          sudo rpm -Va | awk '/^..5/ && $2 != "c"'


          ... which ties together the grep ^..5 idea along with ignoring files that are classified as configuration files. Alternatively, you could capture every flagged line of output and then "whitelist" config files where you've accepted the risk of change -- then, you're alerted when a presumed-static config file changes.



          Without repackaging the RPM's, I do not know of a way to update the digest in the RPM database to indicate that you've changed a config file, which is why I suggest the above workarounds.






          share|improve this answer























          • I've just discovered meuh's answer here which goes into more detail regarding an RPM being able to exclude certain files from future verification.

            – Jeff Schaller
            Mar 28 at 19:32















          1














          To take the easy part first, the grep '^..5 portion investigates the output for lines that start with any two characters followed by a 5. That 5 represents (from man rpm):




          5 digest (formerly MD5 sum) differs




          as a fairly good indicator that the corresponding file has changed.



          Next, I would encourage any rpm -Va | grep ... investigation to ignore config files. These are files, like you point out, that are intended to be changed by the system administrator. Luckily, they are indicated in the rpm -Va output with a c marker:




          The format of the output is a string of 9 characters, a possible attribute marker:



          c %config configuration file.
          d %doc documentation file.
          g %ghost file (i.e. the file contents are not included in the package payload).
          l %license license file.
          r %readme readme file.


          from the package header, followed by the file name.




          ... so I would consider something along the lines of:



          sudo rpm -Va | awk '/^..5/ && $2 != "c"'


          ... which ties together the grep ^..5 idea along with ignoring files that are classified as configuration files. Alternatively, you could capture every flagged line of output and then "whitelist" config files where you've accepted the risk of change -- then, you're alerted when a presumed-static config file changes.



          Without repackaging the RPM's, I do not know of a way to update the digest in the RPM database to indicate that you've changed a config file, which is why I suggest the above workarounds.






          share|improve this answer























          • I've just discovered meuh's answer here which goes into more detail regarding an RPM being able to exclude certain files from future verification.

            – Jeff Schaller
            Mar 28 at 19:32













          1












          1








          1







          To take the easy part first, the grep '^..5 portion investigates the output for lines that start with any two characters followed by a 5. That 5 represents (from man rpm):




          5 digest (formerly MD5 sum) differs




          as a fairly good indicator that the corresponding file has changed.



          Next, I would encourage any rpm -Va | grep ... investigation to ignore config files. These are files, like you point out, that are intended to be changed by the system administrator. Luckily, they are indicated in the rpm -Va output with a c marker:




          The format of the output is a string of 9 characters, a possible attribute marker:



          c %config configuration file.
          d %doc documentation file.
          g %ghost file (i.e. the file contents are not included in the package payload).
          l %license license file.
          r %readme readme file.


          from the package header, followed by the file name.




          ... so I would consider something along the lines of:



          sudo rpm -Va | awk '/^..5/ && $2 != "c"'


          ... which ties together the grep ^..5 idea along with ignoring files that are classified as configuration files. Alternatively, you could capture every flagged line of output and then "whitelist" config files where you've accepted the risk of change -- then, you're alerted when a presumed-static config file changes.



          Without repackaging the RPM's, I do not know of a way to update the digest in the RPM database to indicate that you've changed a config file, which is why I suggest the above workarounds.






          share|improve this answer













          To take the easy part first, the grep '^..5 portion investigates the output for lines that start with any two characters followed by a 5. That 5 represents (from man rpm):




          5 digest (formerly MD5 sum) differs




          as a fairly good indicator that the corresponding file has changed.



          Next, I would encourage any rpm -Va | grep ... investigation to ignore config files. These are files, like you point out, that are intended to be changed by the system administrator. Luckily, they are indicated in the rpm -Va output with a c marker:




          The format of the output is a string of 9 characters, a possible attribute marker:



          c %config configuration file.
          d %doc documentation file.
          g %ghost file (i.e. the file contents are not included in the package payload).
          l %license license file.
          r %readme readme file.


          from the package header, followed by the file name.




          ... so I would consider something along the lines of:



          sudo rpm -Va | awk '/^..5/ && $2 != "c"'


          ... which ties together the grep ^..5 idea along with ignoring files that are classified as configuration files. Alternatively, you could capture every flagged line of output and then "whitelist" config files where you've accepted the risk of change -- then, you're alerted when a presumed-static config file changes.



          Without repackaging the RPM's, I do not know of a way to update the digest in the RPM database to indicate that you've changed a config file, which is why I suggest the above workarounds.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Mar 28 at 19:30









          Jeff SchallerJeff Schaller

          44.7k1163145




          44.7k1163145












          • I've just discovered meuh's answer here which goes into more detail regarding an RPM being able to exclude certain files from future verification.

            – Jeff Schaller
            Mar 28 at 19:32

















          • I've just discovered meuh's answer here which goes into more detail regarding an RPM being able to exclude certain files from future verification.

            – Jeff Schaller
            Mar 28 at 19:32
















          I've just discovered meuh's answer here which goes into more detail regarding an RPM being able to exclude certain files from future verification.

          – Jeff Schaller
          Mar 28 at 19:32





          I've just discovered meuh's answer here which goes into more detail regarding an RPM being able to exclude certain files from future verification.

          – Jeff Schaller
          Mar 28 at 19:32

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f509282%2frpm-v-verify-purpose%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -rpm, security

          Popular posts from this blog

          Word for a person who has no opinion about whether god existsWord for having a definite opinion while simultaneously withholding judgment?What's the opposite of “newcomer? Is ”veteran" OK?What do you call an “atheist” who might believe in an afterlife?What's a word for someone who wants to voice opinions but not have them challenged?Word for someone who dismisses contrary opinions as irrational?Somone who thinks they are overly special/out of the ordinaryIs there a word, phrase or idiom for “a person who is incapable of thinking about the future”?The belief that a god is human-likeA word for a non-famous person/thing you have heard a lot aboutAdjective for a person who enjoys taking care of their appearance

          What was this official D&D 3.5e Lovecraft-flavored rulebook?What was this set of RPG tools called?As a first-time DM should I let my players play complex character classes and roles?Nymph's Kiss and the RelationshipWhat was the name of this Cleric Prestige Class that shapes metal with its bare hands?Are the 3.5e Dragonlance books third party or official works?What's up with the domain Vile Darkness?What was this 80s book about RPGs?What was the name of this Werewolf band?What book had Rituals to “upgrade” animal companions to keep them viable at higher levels?What was this RPG that had rules for player-owned businesses?

          2017 IndyCar Series Contents Series news Teams and drivers Schedule Season summary Footnotes References External links Navigation menu"INDYCAR: Initial 2018 bodywork concepts unveiled"the original"IndyCar confirms switch to Performance Friction brakes in 2017""AJ Foyt Racing will switch to Chevy"the original"Carlos Munoz, Conor Daly will drive for AJ Foyt Racing""Zach Veach's Indy 500 Debut Confirmed with Foyt""No mass exodus from Honda after Ganassi switch""Ex-F1 driver Sato joins Andretti Autosport for 2017 IndyCar season""IndyCar's Ryan Hunter-Reay, sponsor DHL paired through 2020""hhgregg and Andretti Autosport announce partnership for key races in 2016""INDYCAR: Rossi re-signs with Andretti"the original"McLaren Formula 1 - Fernando Alonso to race at Indy 500 with McLaren, Honda and Andretti Autosport""Shank will finally take part in Indy 500 with Harvey, Andretti | MotorSportsTalk""Andretti adds Jack Harvey to Indy 500 field""Ganassi switches to Honda power for 2017""INDYCAR: Chilton returns to Ganassi"the original"IndyCar silly season: Who's going where in 2017?""INDYCAR: Kanaan, NTT Data return to Ganassi"the original"Kimball to remain at Ganassi for 2017""Coyne confirms Bourdais for 2017 IndyCar season""Davison to sub for Bourdais in Indy 500"the original"Gutierrez confirmed for Detroit IndyCar debut""Gutierrez returns with Coyne for rest of 2017 season""Vautier to drive for Coyne at Texas"the original"INDYCAR: Coyne confirms Jones for 2017"the original"Pippa Mann returns to Coyne for Indy 500""Karam, Dreyer & Reinbold teaming up again for Indianapolis 500""Pigot to return to Ed Carpenter Racing""Hildebrand confirmed as full-time Ed Carpenter driver""Veach to replace injured Hildebrand at Barber"the originalNew Team Harding Racing Enters Chaves for 101st Indianapolis 500"Juncos Racing Announces Entry in 101st Running of the Indianapolis 500 :: Juncos Racing""Juncos confirms Pigot for Indy 500""Saavedra confirmed in Juncos' second 500 entry"the original"Lazier confirms Indy 500 run after son's USF2000 debut"the original"Claman DeMelo to race for RLLR at Sonoma"the original"Rahal signs Servia and ace engineer for 2017""IndyCar: Aleshin returns with Schmidt"the original"Aleshin replaced by Saavedra for Toronto""Jack Harvey will pilot SPM No. 7 car at Watkins Glen, Sonoma""Jay Howard confirmed in Tony Stewart's supported SPM Indy entry""INDYCAR: Newgarden to wave the flag at Penske"the original"Pagenaud opts for No. 1 in 2017"the original"Penske confirms Newgarden for 2017""Montoya to stay with Team Penske in 2017""Target leaving IndyCar after 27 seasons with Chip Ganassi""Cavin: IndyCar could see complete driver/team shakeup in 2017""End of the road for KV Racing?""KV Racing confirms closure, equipment sold to Juncos""Juncos confirms IndyCar Series entry"the original"Juncos readies IndyCar program, aims for '17 500"the original"Harding Racing to add Texas, Pocono to schedule"the original"Sato signs with Andretti Autosport for 2017""INDYCAR: Aleshin in Doubt at SPM"the original"Long Beach notebook: JR Hildebrand breaks hand""Hildebrand cleared to return at Phoenix"the original"Bourdais to undergo surgery on multiple fractures""Aleshin loses Schmidt Peterson IndyCar ride""Saavedra in at SPM for Pocono, Gateway"the original"Bourdais to make return at Gateway"the original"The IndyCar Grand Prix no longer is sponsored by Angie's List""2017 IndyCar Series rulebook""2017 Verizon IndyCar Series Official Rulebook"Official websiteeeeee