Re: encryption
On Sat 21 Apr 2018 at 20:10:27 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Sat 21 Apr 2018 at 13:54:03 -0500, David Wright wrote:
>
> > On Sat 21 Apr 2018 at 19:14:06 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > > Is it possible that ps output does not show parameters to switches?
> >
> > Not AFAIK. Here, I can see lines in the list such as:
>
> Then I do not understand why paramters are not shown. Maybe they come
> later in the output? I can forsee a few sleepness nights trying to
> figure this out. :)
>
> At this juncture it appears I should have no worries about ps revealing
> the secret.
As well as David C's mention of "ps -f" (which was news to me), I should
point out that I use "ps ax" as a matter of course, and "ps wwax" when
when interesting bits fall off the right margin; ie the BSD flavour of ps
gives this information by default.
> > 1247 ? Ss 0:00 wpa_supplicant -B -i wlp2s0 -c /var/lib/wicd/configurations/44xxfcxxxxxx -Dwext
> > 1706 tty1 S 0:00 xterm -geometry 110x38+0+0 -fn neep-iso10646-1-18 -xrm *Page: 3 1
> >
> > As you can see, I've mangled the MAC of my router that would be revealed otherwise.
> >
> > And I wouldn't like to rely on winning a race with ps to avoid capture
> > of information exposed in my command lines.
>
> I am not after winning any races but (seeing as you brought the issue
> up) knowing whether ps sees my secret and how to go about finding that
> out.
ps might not be the best tool for deliberately finding the info above.
The obvious place to look is /proc/<PID>/cmdline (where NULs separate
the items). One can imagine a scenario where one tries to keep up with
the PID incrementation and hoover up all the cmdlines on the system as
they fly by.
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: