Re: Proposal of new group
According to Tomasz Wegrzanowski:
> > But the source might contain a buffer overflow exploit, or another
> > exploit. Yes, I wrote the code myself, and there is even a comment
> > in the code about running setuid in a special group. But in my experience
> > _every_ setuid program has at least one hole, no matter how careful
> > you are. Avoiding setuid programs (esp. setuid root) is important.
>
> shutdown accepts no user input as far i know so how user can do
> buffer overflow?
Well, if you really think that way, you are certainly _not_ the
person to make something setuid root. Do you follow BugTRAQ? Know
about l0pth security advisories? CERT? www.rootshell.com ?
Think of command line arguments, environment variables .. that's
all 'user input'
> Simple enough suid programs doesnt have always holes.
95% of them do, just because they are simple.
> > If you still consider doing this, at least 2 different experienced
> > people should audit the program you want to make setuid (shutdown)
> > to see if there are no security problems involved.
>
> Come here and find them.
Nope, I am not the person who wants to make shutdown setuid root,
and besides I am the author of shutdown so I am the last person
who should audit the code.
Mike.
--
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.
Reply to: