Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: SSH Exploit Request


From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:55:02 -0500

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 20:56:51 EST, Vladimir Parkhaev said:

The fact is, upgrading sshd (not XYZ!) does not require reboot

Normally, yes.

                                                               and does
not affect any other processes that server runs.

Again, normally yes. But if you believe it's *impossible* for a run-away
process to not affect other processes, I suggest you go read up on fork bombs,
the numerous ways that various OOM-killers in the Linux kernel have proven
deficient, and a lot of other related issues.

                                                 If you don't believe
me, just... try it :)

I've *been* trying it since it was ssh.com's version 1.2.<verysmallN>
or so. Has worked reasonably every time, except for the one time I built it on
an IRIX 6.5.N and installed it on 6.5.M, where M<N.  It promptly ran afoul
of an API change, went runaway, and earned me a trip to the data center to
unsnarl things at the console.  (I also hit a similar problem when the
sshd was linked on an AIX system with the 4.3.3.75 version of libc, but
tried to run on a pre-.75 version, but *that* one promptly died a quick
and horrible death without impacting anything else).

<estimates number of SSH versions times number of machines, and gets at
least 4 digits>  So we've got some 99.98% reliability in installing sshd
without disruption.  But 99.98 isn't 100 unless you work at Intel.
Any my point is that anybody who's running a production system who is
installing *ANYTHING* with the attitude "this can't *possibly* fail" is
looking for a VERY rude awakening when it *does* fail.

So tell me - do you trust the installs enough to just do it and logout
without bothering trying to ssh in to make sure it works first? ;)

Attachment: _bin
Description:


Current thread: