chkrootkit shows “tcpd” as INFECTED. Is it a false positive?
Scan by chkrootkit shows "tcpd" as being INFECTED.
Although a scan by rkhunter shows ok,(except for regular false positives)
Shall I be worried?
(I'm on Ubuntu 16.10 with 4.8.0-37-generic)
security malware rootkit tcpdump chkrootkit
asked Feb 15 '17 at 5:59
marinermariner
128124
add a comment |
Scan by chkrootkit shows "tcpd" as being INFECTED.
Although a scan by rkhunter shows ok,(except for regular false positives)
Shall I be worried?
(I'm on Ubuntu 16.10 with 4.8.0-37-generic)
security malware rootkit tcpdump chkrootkit
asked Feb 15 '17 at 5:59
marinermariner
128124
2
ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2346505
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:05
muru, thanks! It helped! p.s. How do i vote for reputation of a user? (you in this case)
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
That was just a comment. I'll post an answer in a moment, which you can accept, if you like.
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
Does direct scansudo chkrootkit tcpdreturnsinfected?
– naXa
Jul 17 '17 at 2:10
1
Mine came up as INFECTED also and it isn't installed.
– Jason
Sep 6 '18 at 22:46
add a comment |
Scan by chkrootkit shows "tcpd" as being INFECTED.
Although a scan by rkhunter shows ok,(except for regular false positives)
Shall I be worried?
(I'm on Ubuntu 16.10 with 4.8.0-37-generic)
security malware rootkit tcpdump chkrootkit
asked Feb 15 '17 at 5:59
marinermariner
128124
Scan by chkrootkit shows "tcpd" as being INFECTED.
Although a scan by rkhunter shows ok,(except for regular false positives)
Shall I be worried?
(I'm on Ubuntu 16.10 with 4.8.0-37-generic)
security malware rootkit tcpdump chkrootkit
security malware rootkit tcpdump chkrootkit
asked Feb 15 '17 at 5:59
marinermariner
128124
asked Feb 15 '17 at 5:59
marinermariner
128124
asked Feb 15 '17 at 5:59
marinermariner
128124
asked Feb 15 '17 at 5:59
marinermariner
128124
asked Feb 15 '17 at 5:59
marinermariner
128124
128124
2
ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2346505
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:05
muru, thanks! It helped! p.s. How do i vote for reputation of a user? (you in this case)
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
That was just a comment. I'll post an answer in a moment, which you can accept, if you like.
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
Does direct scansudo chkrootkit tcpdreturnsinfected?
– naXa
Jul 17 '17 at 2:10
1
Mine came up as INFECTED also and it isn't installed.
– Jason
Sep 6 '18 at 22:46
add a comment |
2
ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2346505
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:05
muru, thanks! It helped! p.s. How do i vote for reputation of a user? (you in this case)
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
That was just a comment. I'll post an answer in a moment, which you can accept, if you like.
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
Does direct scansudo chkrootkit tcpdreturnsinfected?
– naXa
Jul 17 '17 at 2:10
1
Mine came up as INFECTED also and it isn't installed.
– Jason
Sep 6 '18 at 22:46
2
2
ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2346505
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:05
ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2346505
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:05
muru, thanks! It helped! p.s. How do i vote for reputation of a user? (you in this case)
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
muru, thanks! It helped! p.s. How do i vote for reputation of a user? (you in this case)
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
That was just a comment. I'll post an answer in a moment, which you can accept, if you like.
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
That was just a comment. I'll post an answer in a moment, which you can accept, if you like.
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
Does direct scan
sudo chkrootkit tcpd returns infected?– naXa
Jul 17 '17 at 2:10
Does direct scan
sudo chkrootkit tcpd returns infected?– naXa
Jul 17 '17 at 2:10
1
1
Mine came up as INFECTED also and it isn't installed.
– Jason
Sep 6 '18 at 22:46
Mine came up as INFECTED also and it isn't installed.
– Jason
Sep 6 '18 at 22:46
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
In this Ubuntu Forums post, user kpatz tested this in a fresh 16.10 VM and chkrootkit still complained, making this a false positive. You can always check if a file has been tampered by comparing the md5sum from the package:
$ dpkg -S /usr/sbin/tcpd
tcpd: /usr/sbin/tcpd
$ (cd /; md5sum -c /var/lib/dpkg/info/tcpd.md5sums)
usr/sbin/safe_finger: OK
usr/sbin/tcpd: OK
usr/sbin/tcpdchk: OK
usr/sbin/tcpdmatch: OK
usr/sbin/try-from: OK
usr/share/man/man8/safe_finger.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpd.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpdchk.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpdmatch.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/try-from.8.gz: OK
Of course, the md5sums file itself maybe tampered, (and so could md5sum itself and so on...).
answered Feb 15 '17 at 6:25
murumuru
1
1
Muru, thank you for such a prompt respond! It was really helpful. (unfortunately the system won't let me vote for your reputation. It says I am not yet allowed to to that :(((((
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:38
When checking if something is malicious or not and checking it against a known good version MD5s are probably the worst hashsums to use due to collisions.
– user364819
Feb 17 '17 at 16:18
2
In my case, using Ubuntu 18.04 tcpd wasn't even installed and it was reported as infected!
– Philippe Delteil
May 30 '18 at 14:34
add a comment |
This is a false positive caused by a bug in the main chkrootkit script. I tried to post the fix here, but was downvoted. I reported the issue to the chkrootkit devs, but if you'd like to fix the issue so that it actually works, you might want to check out: https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-security-4/chkrootkit-tcpd-521683/page2.html#post5788733
add a comment |
Mine was also listed as "INFECTED" (Ubuntu 18.10)... so I cross checked tcpd using the debsums utility ie:
sudo debsums | grep tcpd
It was listed as "OK".
answered Feb 12 at 2:05
Jay MarmJay Marm
1012
add a comment |
You can try uploading them to sites for testing like virustotal and I believe BitDefender has a one minute rootkit scanner program available (unsure of multi OS support).
If you have a rootkit, there's no way to know if it's a false positive without solid documentation as was posted above, considering that a malicious program with root access can hide itself. You seem to be concerned, or are just following the syntax of CAPS LOCKS, but in the future I would recommend vaulting and backing up essential files (either through a cloud or an external that you must take care to not cross infect) such as databases, family photos, work, unsavory videos, etc.
check the md5 sum for inconsistencies for the important junk. Which is mostly anything that can be given root access or the distro itself. And if you are running a fresh install or don't mind doing one, you could always wipe and check it once more.
Quick edit:
BitDefender does not actually offer support for anything other than Windows. Sidenote, all antivirus programs are datamining you and your internet usage. Open source ftw.
tl;dr on the insidious nature of rootkits and how easily they propagate.
answered Feb 12 at 2:15
avisitoritseemsavisitoritseems
10110
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
};
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: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f883495%2fchkrootkit-shows-tcpd-as-infected-is-it-a-false-positive%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
In this Ubuntu Forums post, user kpatz tested this in a fresh 16.10 VM and chkrootkit still complained, making this a false positive. You can always check if a file has been tampered by comparing the md5sum from the package:
$ dpkg -S /usr/sbin/tcpd
tcpd: /usr/sbin/tcpd
$ (cd /; md5sum -c /var/lib/dpkg/info/tcpd.md5sums)
usr/sbin/safe_finger: OK
usr/sbin/tcpd: OK
usr/sbin/tcpdchk: OK
usr/sbin/tcpdmatch: OK
usr/sbin/try-from: OK
usr/share/man/man8/safe_finger.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpd.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpdchk.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpdmatch.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/try-from.8.gz: OK
Of course, the md5sums file itself maybe tampered, (and so could md5sum itself and so on...).
answered Feb 15 '17 at 6:25
murumuru
1
1
Muru, thank you for such a prompt respond! It was really helpful. (unfortunately the system won't let me vote for your reputation. It says I am not yet allowed to to that :(((((
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:38
When checking if something is malicious or not and checking it against a known good version MD5s are probably the worst hashsums to use due to collisions.
– user364819
Feb 17 '17 at 16:18
2
In my case, using Ubuntu 18.04 tcpd wasn't even installed and it was reported as infected!
– Philippe Delteil
May 30 '18 at 14:34
add a comment |
In this Ubuntu Forums post, user kpatz tested this in a fresh 16.10 VM and chkrootkit still complained, making this a false positive. You can always check if a file has been tampered by comparing the md5sum from the package:
$ dpkg -S /usr/sbin/tcpd
tcpd: /usr/sbin/tcpd
$ (cd /; md5sum -c /var/lib/dpkg/info/tcpd.md5sums)
usr/sbin/safe_finger: OK
usr/sbin/tcpd: OK
usr/sbin/tcpdchk: OK
usr/sbin/tcpdmatch: OK
usr/sbin/try-from: OK
usr/share/man/man8/safe_finger.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpd.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpdchk.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpdmatch.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/try-from.8.gz: OK
Of course, the md5sums file itself maybe tampered, (and so could md5sum itself and so on...).
answered Feb 15 '17 at 6:25
murumuru
1
1
Muru, thank you for such a prompt respond! It was really helpful. (unfortunately the system won't let me vote for your reputation. It says I am not yet allowed to to that :(((((
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:38
When checking if something is malicious or not and checking it against a known good version MD5s are probably the worst hashsums to use due to collisions.
– user364819
Feb 17 '17 at 16:18
2
In my case, using Ubuntu 18.04 tcpd wasn't even installed and it was reported as infected!
– Philippe Delteil
May 30 '18 at 14:34
add a comment |
In this Ubuntu Forums post, user kpatz tested this in a fresh 16.10 VM and chkrootkit still complained, making this a false positive. You can always check if a file has been tampered by comparing the md5sum from the package:
$ dpkg -S /usr/sbin/tcpd
tcpd: /usr/sbin/tcpd
$ (cd /; md5sum -c /var/lib/dpkg/info/tcpd.md5sums)
usr/sbin/safe_finger: OK
usr/sbin/tcpd: OK
usr/sbin/tcpdchk: OK
usr/sbin/tcpdmatch: OK
usr/sbin/try-from: OK
usr/share/man/man8/safe_finger.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpd.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpdchk.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpdmatch.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/try-from.8.gz: OK
Of course, the md5sums file itself maybe tampered, (and so could md5sum itself and so on...).
answered Feb 15 '17 at 6:25
murumuru
1
In this Ubuntu Forums post, user kpatz tested this in a fresh 16.10 VM and chkrootkit still complained, making this a false positive. You can always check if a file has been tampered by comparing the md5sum from the package:
$ dpkg -S /usr/sbin/tcpd
tcpd: /usr/sbin/tcpd
$ (cd /; md5sum -c /var/lib/dpkg/info/tcpd.md5sums)
usr/sbin/safe_finger: OK
usr/sbin/tcpd: OK
usr/sbin/tcpdchk: OK
usr/sbin/tcpdmatch: OK
usr/sbin/try-from: OK
usr/share/man/man8/safe_finger.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpd.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpdchk.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/tcpdmatch.8.gz: OK
usr/share/man/man8/try-from.8.gz: OK
Of course, the md5sums file itself maybe tampered, (and so could md5sum itself and so on...).
answered Feb 15 '17 at 6:25
murumuru
1
answered Feb 15 '17 at 6:25
murumuru
1
answered Feb 15 '17 at 6:25
murumuru
1
answered Feb 15 '17 at 6:25
murumuru
1
1
1
Muru, thank you for such a prompt respond! It was really helpful. (unfortunately the system won't let me vote for your reputation. It says I am not yet allowed to to that :(((((
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:38
When checking if something is malicious or not and checking it against a known good version MD5s are probably the worst hashsums to use due to collisions.
– user364819
Feb 17 '17 at 16:18
2
In my case, using Ubuntu 18.04 tcpd wasn't even installed and it was reported as infected!
– Philippe Delteil
May 30 '18 at 14:34
add a comment |
1
Muru, thank you for such a prompt respond! It was really helpful. (unfortunately the system won't let me vote for your reputation. It says I am not yet allowed to to that :(((((
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:38
When checking if something is malicious or not and checking it against a known good version MD5s are probably the worst hashsums to use due to collisions.
– user364819
Feb 17 '17 at 16:18
2
In my case, using Ubuntu 18.04 tcpd wasn't even installed and it was reported as infected!
– Philippe Delteil
May 30 '18 at 14:34
1
1
Muru, thank you for such a prompt respond! It was really helpful. (unfortunately the system won't let me vote for your reputation. It says I am not yet allowed to to that :(((((
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:38
Muru, thank you for such a prompt respond! It was really helpful. (unfortunately the system won't let me vote for your reputation. It says I am not yet allowed to to that :(((((
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:38
When checking if something is malicious or not and checking it against a known good version MD5s are probably the worst hashsums to use due to collisions.
– user364819
Feb 17 '17 at 16:18
When checking if something is malicious or not and checking it against a known good version MD5s are probably the worst hashsums to use due to collisions.
– user364819
Feb 17 '17 at 16:18
2
2
In my case, using Ubuntu 18.04 tcpd wasn't even installed and it was reported as infected!
– Philippe Delteil
May 30 '18 at 14:34
In my case, using Ubuntu 18.04 tcpd wasn't even installed and it was reported as infected!
– Philippe Delteil
May 30 '18 at 14:34
add a comment |
This is a false positive caused by a bug in the main chkrootkit script. I tried to post the fix here, but was downvoted. I reported the issue to the chkrootkit devs, but if you'd like to fix the issue so that it actually works, you might want to check out: https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-security-4/chkrootkit-tcpd-521683/page2.html#post5788733
add a comment |
This is a false positive caused by a bug in the main chkrootkit script. I tried to post the fix here, but was downvoted. I reported the issue to the chkrootkit devs, but if you'd like to fix the issue so that it actually works, you might want to check out: https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-security-4/chkrootkit-tcpd-521683/page2.html#post5788733
add a comment |
This is a false positive caused by a bug in the main chkrootkit script. I tried to post the fix here, but was downvoted. I reported the issue to the chkrootkit devs, but if you'd like to fix the issue so that it actually works, you might want to check out: https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-security-4/chkrootkit-tcpd-521683/page2.html#post5788733
This is a false positive caused by a bug in the main chkrootkit script. I tried to post the fix here, but was downvoted. I reported the issue to the chkrootkit devs, but if you'd like to fix the issue so that it actually works, you might want to check out: https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-security-4/chkrootkit-tcpd-521683/page2.html#post5788733
answered Dec 4 '17 at 23:41
user760856
add a comment |
add a comment |
Mine was also listed as "INFECTED" (Ubuntu 18.10)... so I cross checked tcpd using the debsums utility ie:
sudo debsums | grep tcpd
It was listed as "OK".
answered Feb 12 at 2:05
Jay MarmJay Marm
1012
add a comment |
Mine was also listed as "INFECTED" (Ubuntu 18.10)... so I cross checked tcpd using the debsums utility ie:
sudo debsums | grep tcpd
It was listed as "OK".
answered Feb 12 at 2:05
Jay MarmJay Marm
1012
add a comment |
Mine was also listed as "INFECTED" (Ubuntu 18.10)... so I cross checked tcpd using the debsums utility ie:
sudo debsums | grep tcpd
It was listed as "OK".
answered Feb 12 at 2:05
Jay MarmJay Marm
1012
Mine was also listed as "INFECTED" (Ubuntu 18.10)... so I cross checked tcpd using the debsums utility ie:
sudo debsums | grep tcpd
It was listed as "OK".
answered Feb 12 at 2:05
Jay MarmJay Marm
1012
answered Feb 12 at 2:05
Jay MarmJay Marm
1012
answered Feb 12 at 2:05
Jay MarmJay Marm
1012
answered Feb 12 at 2:05
Jay MarmJay Marm
1012
1012
add a comment |
add a comment |
You can try uploading them to sites for testing like virustotal and I believe BitDefender has a one minute rootkit scanner program available (unsure of multi OS support).
If you have a rootkit, there's no way to know if it's a false positive without solid documentation as was posted above, considering that a malicious program with root access can hide itself. You seem to be concerned, or are just following the syntax of CAPS LOCKS, but in the future I would recommend vaulting and backing up essential files (either through a cloud or an external that you must take care to not cross infect) such as databases, family photos, work, unsavory videos, etc.
check the md5 sum for inconsistencies for the important junk. Which is mostly anything that can be given root access or the distro itself. And if you are running a fresh install or don't mind doing one, you could always wipe and check it once more.
Quick edit:
BitDefender does not actually offer support for anything other than Windows. Sidenote, all antivirus programs are datamining you and your internet usage. Open source ftw.
tl;dr on the insidious nature of rootkits and how easily they propagate.
answered Feb 12 at 2:15
avisitoritseemsavisitoritseems
10110
add a comment |
You can try uploading them to sites for testing like virustotal and I believe BitDefender has a one minute rootkit scanner program available (unsure of multi OS support).
If you have a rootkit, there's no way to know if it's a false positive without solid documentation as was posted above, considering that a malicious program with root access can hide itself. You seem to be concerned, or are just following the syntax of CAPS LOCKS, but in the future I would recommend vaulting and backing up essential files (either through a cloud or an external that you must take care to not cross infect) such as databases, family photos, work, unsavory videos, etc.
check the md5 sum for inconsistencies for the important junk. Which is mostly anything that can be given root access or the distro itself. And if you are running a fresh install or don't mind doing one, you could always wipe and check it once more.
Quick edit:
BitDefender does not actually offer support for anything other than Windows. Sidenote, all antivirus programs are datamining you and your internet usage. Open source ftw.
tl;dr on the insidious nature of rootkits and how easily they propagate.
answered Feb 12 at 2:15
avisitoritseemsavisitoritseems
10110
add a comment |
You can try uploading them to sites for testing like virustotal and I believe BitDefender has a one minute rootkit scanner program available (unsure of multi OS support).
If you have a rootkit, there's no way to know if it's a false positive without solid documentation as was posted above, considering that a malicious program with root access can hide itself. You seem to be concerned, or are just following the syntax of CAPS LOCKS, but in the future I would recommend vaulting and backing up essential files (either through a cloud or an external that you must take care to not cross infect) such as databases, family photos, work, unsavory videos, etc.
check the md5 sum for inconsistencies for the important junk. Which is mostly anything that can be given root access or the distro itself. And if you are running a fresh install or don't mind doing one, you could always wipe and check it once more.
Quick edit:
BitDefender does not actually offer support for anything other than Windows. Sidenote, all antivirus programs are datamining you and your internet usage. Open source ftw.
tl;dr on the insidious nature of rootkits and how easily they propagate.
answered Feb 12 at 2:15
avisitoritseemsavisitoritseems
10110
You can try uploading them to sites for testing like virustotal and I believe BitDefender has a one minute rootkit scanner program available (unsure of multi OS support).
If you have a rootkit, there's no way to know if it's a false positive without solid documentation as was posted above, considering that a malicious program with root access can hide itself. You seem to be concerned, or are just following the syntax of CAPS LOCKS, but in the future I would recommend vaulting and backing up essential files (either through a cloud or an external that you must take care to not cross infect) such as databases, family photos, work, unsavory videos, etc.
check the md5 sum for inconsistencies for the important junk. Which is mostly anything that can be given root access or the distro itself. And if you are running a fresh install or don't mind doing one, you could always wipe and check it once more.
Quick edit:
BitDefender does not actually offer support for anything other than Windows. Sidenote, all antivirus programs are datamining you and your internet usage. Open source ftw.
tl;dr on the insidious nature of rootkits and how easily they propagate.
answered Feb 12 at 2:15
avisitoritseemsavisitoritseems
10110
edited Feb 12 at 2:21
answered Feb 12 at 2:15
avisitoritseemsavisitoritseems
10110
answered Feb 12 at 2:15
avisitoritseemsavisitoritseems
10110
answered Feb 12 at 2:15
avisitoritseemsavisitoritseems
10110
10110
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- 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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f883495%2fchkrootkit-shows-tcpd-as-infected-is-it-a-false-positive%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
2
ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2346505
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:05
muru, thanks! It helped! p.s. How do i vote for reputation of a user? (you in this case)
– mariner
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
That was just a comment. I'll post an answer in a moment, which you can accept, if you like.
– muru
Feb 15 '17 at 6:16
Does direct scan
sudo chkrootkit tcpdreturnsinfected?– naXa
Jul 17 '17 at 2:10
1
Mine came up as INFECTED also and it isn't installed.
– Jason
Sep 6 '18 at 22:46