Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!reader5.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Check If Your Distro Is Vulnerable To XZ Backdoor
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2024 14:17:01 -0500
Organization: Modern Human
Message-ID: <uuf17d$o69$8@solani.org>
References: <17c1daf1b743b4f8$156268$3716115$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com>
 <uuc40a$22uoo$1@solani.org> <uuehj4$2htpk$2@dont-email.me>
 <uues7i$o69$2@solani.org> <uuev29$2l6ri$2@dont-email.me>
 <uuevej$o69$5@solani.org> <uuf07o$2lfi5$1@dont-email.me>
 <uuf0er$o69$6@solani.org> <uuf0sp$o69$7@solani.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2024 19:17:01 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: solani.org;
	logging-data="24777"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@news.solani.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EWVjlP3xIMYFG2s0/MygHkhlrxk=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <uuf0sp$o69$7@solani.org>
X-User-ID: eJwFwQcBwEAIBDBLrINHDmX4l9AE6uwd5nDD4UIkzz4C3VWw4NU1R/b25IK2vIaYJgvnGNn3qFJFe8xbf1uOFb8=
Bytes: 2287
Lines: 37

On 4/1/24 14:11, Physfitfreak wrote:
> On 4/1/24 14:03, Physfitfreak wrote:
>> On 4/1/24 14:00, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>> Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote at 18:46 this Monday (GMT):
>>>> On 4/1/24 13:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>> which sshd
>>>>
>>>> I get:
>>>>
>>>> hydrogen@hydrogen-OptiPlex-7050:~$ which sshd
>>>> hydrogen@hydrogen-OptiPlex-7050:~$
>>>>
>>>> as if it just ignored it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Weird, probably means it's not installed..
>>
>> I get the same result with command,
>>
>> which
>>
>> by itself. So it is something about the command, not sshd.
> 
> 
> No, the command: which exists of course but requires an argument or 
> file. I don't know why running it by itself doesn't give error saying it 
> requires a file or argument.
> 
> It responds to command: which ls   as it's supposed to. So sshd, 
> whatever it is, is certainly not on my system.
> 
> 


Does sshd need to be on the system for security? Or is it the sshd 
itself that has provided a backdoor?