Bugtraq mailing list archives
Re: local root on linux 2.2.15
From: guenther () GAC EDU (Philip Guenther)
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 15:18:58 -0500
Wojciech Purczynski <wp () ELZABSOFT PL> writes:
Procmail seems to be affected by this hole if used as local-mailer for sendmail. If CAP_SETUID bit is cleared procmail doesn't drop privileges and may execute luser's program that mail is forwarded to in ~user/.procmailrc with root privileges.
Question: given this bug, is it now the community expectation that every program that setuids from 0 to non-zero should check for the presence of this kernel bug? The sendmail people have enhance sendmail in just such a fashion and I'm wondering whether I, as current maintainer of procmail, should do so to procmail. Are we going to see new versions of perl, screen, xterm, nxterm, and rxvt (all of which are setuid root on the Linux system in front of me) that contain code to detect this? I suspect so, and I'll add the requisite code to procmail for the next version. When is a kernel bug so egregious that application writers don't need to work around it? Philip Guenther
Current thread:
- local root on linux 2.2.15 Peter van Dijk (Jun 07)
- Mcafee Alerting DOS vulnerability Harry Schmilllson (Jun 07)
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Wojciech Purczynski (Jun 08)
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Tomasz Grabowski (Jun 08)
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Philip Guenther (Jun 08)
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Wojciech Purczynski (Jun 12)
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Jeff Dafoe (Jun 14)
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Wojciech Purczynski (Jun 14)
- MS-040 'proof of concept' code Renaud Deraison (Jun 13)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Tollef Fog Heen (Jun 11)
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Peter da Silva (Jun 15)
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Firstname Lastname (Jun 15)
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Robert Watson (Jun 18)
- Net Tools PKI server exploits Jim Stickley (Jun 19)
- Re: local root on linux 2.2.15 Peter da Silva (Jun 15)