Re: repeated failure of store - securty hack?



Thanks Susan for the post it is helpful

The server is not used as a workstation, or for surfing, but is a dedicated
server.

I ran the security programs as suggested on the Microsoft website. and as
mentioned, they found nothing. The beta program is now removed, thanks.

I am fairly sure that the logon/logoff events were not happening at the rate
of 30 per minute before this week, nor were there permission change events.

As I mentioned, this is now happening on two discreet servers which are not
connected or related. My contact with them is the only common denominator.

I do not think that a disc hardware problem is likely on two separate
systems in the same week?

On one of them, the one with only one processor, the lsass.exe process is
taking up 35 - 50% processor activity and inhibiting performance

I will try to contact MS product support, but would appreciate any further
thoughts Please clarify what is PSS?

many thanks

John McCombe

"Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks" wrote:

> I don't run Antispyware on my server because I don't surf there. Thus I
> don't have the threat.
>
> Yes on a DC like this you will have lots of logons/offs.
>
> Truly call PSS, ask for an analysis they can put your mind at ease [or
> not] but their analysis has to be done one on one with your event logs,
> It's not something that can be done in a newsgroup.
>
> John McCombe wrote:
> > Thanks for your posts, they are helpful.
> >
> > Latest update I have the same MO appearing on another server, not related to
> > or connected to the first one (I am the only common denominator, I visited
> > this new one the day after the first).
> >
> > This server has been running ok for three years, it has been running ok 72
> > days since last rebot. I received email alerts regarding the store start
> > pending, this afternoon. Mail delivery had ceased. Security logs show
> > repeated logon logoff events, Store log files were corrupted.
> >
> > lsass.exe process is taking up 35 - 50% processor activity. This is a 1
> > processor 2.8GHz system. (The first system is a 2X dual processor 2.8GHz and
> > shows no noticable change in processor activity, but for high disc activity)
> >
> > I have antivirus software running at the webhost for email, and for each
> > workstation - not a free one. I have the MS firewall, and a hardware firewall
> > on the router.
> >
> > I will remove the beta software, but why was it recommended on the Microsoft
> > security site?
> >
> > Note that the situation occurred prior to the installation of the software.
> >
> > Is it normal to have so many logon/logoff events and to have attempts to
> > change permissions? How can address this?
> >
> > I am still not convinced that it is hardware - not on two different systems,
> > one after the other.
> >
> > How can I monitor and restrict the logon activity? Note that this is not
> > user activity.
> >
> > I understand that I may not be doing best practice, but what I need now is
> > a strategy to sort this out. I would appreciate more advice
> >
> > John McCombe
> >
> >
> >
> > "Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks" wrote:
> >
> >
> >>You can always call Microsoft product support - Security and discuss the
> >>issues.
> >>
> >>Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
> >>
> >>>In news:05004143-60D4-45E8-B0E4-7E2E874BDCDD@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
> >>>John McCombe <JohnMcCombe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> typed:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Hi
> >>>>
> >>>>I have a problem with a sbs 2003 server runnig fine since
> >>>>commissioning August 05. On last Monday morning 08:39 ther were 50+
> >>>>attempts to log in to the server from a (win98) client using the
> >>>>wrong password and the user was locked out.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Disable account lockout - it's a bad idea.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>I received an email
> >>>>warning. Then the users came in at 9:00 and advised me that noone
> >>>>could log in. I am remote from the server, and could not access it
> >>>>either.
> >>>>
> >>>>I recommended a soft re-boot, but unfortunately they could not do so,
> >>>>and powered off & on.
> >>>>
> >>>>At this stage, login was allowed, but email delivery was not working.
> >>>>I checked in the event logs and was told that stor could not stsrt as
> >>>>the exxx log file was corrupt
> >>>>
> >>>>Using the MS KB I restored the log files form backup and the store
> >>>>stsred ok - email traffic ok.
> >>>>
> >>>>This lasted about 28 hours, and the same symptoms occured - store not
> >>>>mounted emails received (by pop3) but not delivered.
> >>>>
> >>>>I went to visit the server - re-booted restored the log files all ok.
> >>>>I ran MS malicious software removel tool nothing found I ran MS
> >>>>antispyware tool nothing found. (it is now running in the background).
> >>>>
> >>>>I left site at 2pm will all messages tracked as delivered ok.
> >>>>
> >>>>At 2:06 the sam happened and email delivery went down
> >>>>
> >>>>I got the following events logged:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Event Type: Warning
> >>>>Event Source: ESE
> >>>>Event Category: Performance
> >>>>Event ID: 508
> >>>>Date: 23/11/2005
> >>>>Time: 14:06:16
> >>>>User: N/A
> >>>>Computer: COULTER-MAIN
> >>>>Description:
> >>>>Information Store (3196) First Storage Group: A request to write to
> >>>>the file "D:\exchsrvr\mdbdata\E00tmp.log" at offset 0
> >>>>(0x0000000000000000) for 1048576 (0x00100000) bytes succeeded, but
> >>>>took an abnormally long time (244 seconds) to be serviced by the OS.
> >>>>This problem is likely due to faulty hardware. Please contact your
> >>>>hardware vendor for further assistance diagnosing the problem.
> >>>>
> >>>>For more information, click
> >>>>http://www.microsoft.com/contentredirect.asp.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Event Type: Warning
> >>>>Event Source: ESENT
> >>>>Event Category: Performance
> >>>>Event ID: 508
> >>>>Date: 23/11/2005
> >>>>Time: 14:06:15
> >>>>User: N/A
> >>>>Computer: COULTER-MAIN
> >>>>Description:
> >>>>wins (1656) A request to write to the file
> >>>>"C:\WINDOWS\system32\wins\j50.log" at offset 389632
> >>>>(0x000000000005f200) for 512 (0x00000200) bytes succeeded, but took
> >>>>an abnormally long time (60 seconds) to be serviced by the OS. This
> >>>>problem is likely due to faulty hardware. Please contact your
> >>>>hardware vendor for further assistance diagnosing the problem.
> >>>>
> >>>>For more information, see Help and Support Center at
> >>>>http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Event Type: Warning
> >>>>Event Source: ESENT
> >>>>Event Category: Performance
> >>>>Event ID: 508
> >>>>Date: 23/11/2005
> >>>>Time: 14:06:15
> >>>>User: N/A
> >>>>Computer: COULTER-MAIN
> >>>>Description:
> >>>>tcpsvcs (2064) A request to write to the file
> >>>>"C:\WINDOWS\System32\dhcp\j50.log" at offset 15360
> >>>>(0x0000000000003c00) for 512 (0x00000200) bytes succeeded, but took
> >>>>an abnormally long time (60 seconds) to be serviced by the OS. This
> >>>>problem is likely due to faulty hardware. Please contact your
> >>>>hardware vendor for further assistance diagnosing the problem.
> >>>>
> >>>>For more information, see Help and Support Center at
> >>>>http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.
> >>>>
> >>>>when I checked the counters it doe show dics idle time low and
> >>>>transfer rate low, which suggests hardware - but considering recent
> >>>>events (and the fact that the driv is new) I am not sure.t
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Well, I'd be inclined to believe it. What's your disk setup? Hardware RAID
> >>>is the best. Got good backups? Take a full backup now.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Also, on checing the security logs I get repeated logon/logoff evemnt
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>><snip>
> >>>
> >>>>I have successfully restored the store again;but for how long?
> >>>>
> >>>>I am thinking rootkit trojan - I have not come across one before and
> >>>>do not want to!
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Please help, I am getting overwhelmed here!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>You need good antivirus software running on your whole network. Do you have
> >>>a separate 'edge' firewall in place or are you using ISA?
> >>>Don't run beta software on your server. And spyware is unlikely to be on it
> >>>unless someone's using it as a workstation, which they shouldn't be. I think
> >>>you have hardware problems, myself.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Many thanks
> >>>>
> >>>>John
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
>
.



Relevant Pages

  • security-basics Digest of: get.123_145
    ... VPN to ASP a security risk? ... Re: Multiple IPSec tunnels? ... Subject: Security NT Server ... VPN to ASP a security risk? ...
    (Security-Basics)
  • << SBS News of the week - Sept 26 >>
    ... And he points to the info you need to put the file on the server in the ... at the network perimeter. ... The Symantec Firewall/VPN and the Gateway Security ... by the firewall at risk. ...
    (microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000)
  • Re: << SBS News of the week - Sept 26 >>
    ... > And he points to the info you need to put the file on the server in the ... > at the network perimeter. ... The Symantec Firewall/VPN and the Gateway Security ... An attacker can exploit these flaws in tandem via specially ...
    (microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000)
  • << SBS News of the week - Sept 26 >>
    ... And he points to the info you need to put the file on the server in the ... at the network perimeter. ... The Symantec Firewall/VPN and the Gateway Security ... by the firewall at risk. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: << SBS News of the week - Sept 26 >>
    ... > And he points to the info you need to put the file on the server in the ... > at the network perimeter. ... The Symantec Firewall/VPN and the Gateway Security ... An attacker can exploit these flaws in tandem via specially ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)