← All rules
SOCLE-CLD-FSP-141// File permissionsmediumpersistent config

Verify permissions on System Login Banner for Remote Connections

Ensures /etc/issue.net is not writable, executable, setuid/setgid or sticky for group or other, so only root can alter the remote login banner.

Checked against the content of a persistent configuration file, the source of truth that survives reboots.

A pass proves? running now✓ on disk✓ survives rebootthe qualified verdict →
Debian 12CIS 1.1.0Debian 13CIS 1.0.0FedoraRHEL 10 / Rocky 10 / AlmaLinux 10RHEL 8 / Rocky 8 / AlmaLinux 8CIS 4.0.0RHEL 9 / Rocky 9 / AlmaLinux 9CIS 2.0.0Ubuntu 22.04CIS 3.0.0Ubuntu 24.04CIS 1.0.0Ubuntu 26.04
One check, maps to 2 standards

A mapping is a cross-reference to where each standard places this requirement, anchored and cross-validated, not a claim of equivalence. A passing check is evidence toward these references, how to read it.

Why this rule matters

Display of a standardized and approved use notification before granting access to the operating system ensures privacy and security notification verbiage used is consistent with applicable laws, directives, policies, regulations, standards and guidance. The /etc/issue.net banner is presented to remote clients (e.g. SSH) before authentication. If the file is group- or world-writable, any unprivileged user could rewrite the banner to mislead users, suppress the legal notice, or inject a phishing message; setuid/setgid/executable bits have no legitimate purpose on a plain text file and only widen the attack surface. Restricting permissions ensures only root can modify the banner.

What Pavois checks

Pavois evaluates the live mode bits of /etc/issue.net on the target (executable/setuid/setgid/sticky/writable by group and other) rather than trusting a documented baseline. Permissions are part of the inode itself, so the audit reads the effective state on disk, there is no drop-in or include mechanism to mislead it. The only_if guard skips the control when the file is absent.

only_if { file('/etc/issue.net').exist? }
describe file('/etc/issue.net') do
  it { should_not be_executable.by('owner') }
  it { should_not be_setuid }
  it { should_not be_executable.by('group') }
  it { should_not be_writable.by('group') }
  it { should_not be_setgid }
  it { should_not be_executable.by('other') }
  it { should_not be_writable.by('other') }
  it { should_not be_sticky }
end

How to verify it is applied

Run stat -c '%A %U %G' /etc/issue.net. Expected: mode -rw-r--r-- (0644) owned by root root, with no write bit for group/other and no s/t bits. A quick check: find /etc/issue.net -perm /0133 must return nothing.

Inspect & investigate

File-permission changes are not logged by default. To detect tampering, watch the file with auditd: auditctl -w /etc/issue.net -p wa -k banner, then review events with grep 'key="banner"' /var/log/audit/audit.log. Current ownership and mode are shown by stat /etc/issue.net.

Remediation

No automated harden plan ships for this rule yet, so it must be applied manually: chown root:root /etc/issue.net && chmod 0644 /etc/issue.net. This clears any group/other write and any setuid/setgid/sticky bits while keeping the banner world-readable.

Pavois applies this with its own harden engine, the plan below, not a shell script:

mode0644
path/etc/issue.net
resourcefile
pavois harden plan local

where the target is local, a user@host SSH alias, or a container , Docs

Impact & precautions

Risk if left mis-set: a non-root user can rewrite the pre-authentication remote banner, removing the legal warning or planting a deceptive message seen by every SSH user. Applying the fix is low-risk: 0644 root:root is the conventional mode and the banner stays readable. Precaution: do not remove the read bit for other, sshd and login display the file to unauthenticated clients, so making it unreadable would blank the banner.

Standards mapping

StandardReferenceTypeVersionConfidence
CIS1.2.8, 1.6.6, 1.7.6directper OS, see the benchmark tablehigh
PCI DSS1.2.8supporting4.0.1medium

Each reference is a cross-reference anchored in the upstream benchmark and cross-validated against the SCAP Security Guide and ansible-lockdown, not a claim of equivalence. Direct = a prescriptive, line-level requirement; supporting = an abstract control family (NIST) the check provides evidence toward. How to read a mapping.

Sources & references