Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : Hosting Security and Technology : Linux Malware Detect vs ConfigServer eXploit Scanner

[Logicidea]

Any experience in using these tools. Do they achieve the same results? CSX has the advantage of being integrated in cPanel but the disadvantage of not being free.

[jon-f]

cxs hands down, maldet is good free software but cxs is real good if you can afford it

[Steven]

They perform different jobs.

Anyway:
Maldet is actively worked on with hundreds of new signatures added every month. Ryan is also working with clamav to have those same signatures included in their software.

FYI: CXS is not going to detect malware that has been uploaded through an RFI exploit unless you run an on-demand scan.

[Logicidea]

Originally Posted by Steven

They perform different jobs.

I was under the impression they did the same or at least very similar things.

[Steven]

Originally Posted by Logicidea

I was under the impression they did the same or at least very similar things.

They are very similar but they work slightly different.

For what its worth - I get more results from maldet.

[k-planethost]

which other scripts will you suggest performing similar job to cxs?
intergrated with cpanel , are there any available for free

[Hillockhosting]

Maldet does not detect all malicious scripts.

Opt for cxs.

[tchryan]

Originally Posted by Hillockhosting

Maldet does not detect all malicious scripts.

Opt for cxs.

One could argue the very same for CXS, none will detect every single threat. However, LMD is community supported and allows for users to easily submit signatures for addition to the project in addition to some glaring project principles that set it apart from CXS, in how signature data is gathered and features such as real-time monitoring.

Check out http://www.rfxn.com/projects/linux-malware-detect/ for all the details and the latest blog post for LMD at:
http://www.rfxn.com/signature-updates-threat-database/

[Steven]

Originally Posted by Hillockhosting

Maldet does not detect all malicious scripts.

Opt for cxs.

Correct. However Maldet finds scripts that cxs doesnt find. Clamav finds scripts that neither of them find. Both of them find scripts that clamav does not find.

Point here is - overlap them. It will be better for your servers health.

[tuxg]

Our thoughts are similar to Steven's in a way.
How about an authoritative and all-inclusive signature database, which can be used by all these so that everyone get benefited?

[Steven]

Originally Posted by tuxg

Our thoughts are similar to Steven's in a way.
How about an authoritative and all-inclusive signature database, which can be used by all these so that everyone get benefited?

Differences in opinions will never let that happen.

[rfxn]

Originally Posted by tuxg

Our thoughts are similar to Steven's in a way.
How about an authoritative and all-inclusive signature database, which can be used by all these so that everyone get benefited?

By working with ClamAV malware team to exchange signature data and along with the CymRU malware hash registery, the LMD project contributes back to the malware detection community at large and helps to strengthen other existing tools in providing accurate and current threat detection. I should also point out that LMD also helps CXS by doing this in that CXS is a wrapper for ClamAV to an extent and in improving ClamAV malware detection, LMD is indirectly improving CXS.

[Peter-SexyWing]

Are these very resources expensive? Which one is the lightest to run on shared hosting environment?

[Steven]

The initial scan from lmd is resource expensive, further scans are not.