Vulnerability Development mailing list archives

Re: uugetty mgetty also...


From: Andrew Sharpe <asharpe () caldera com>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:48:18 -0800

Note that you are already root, the same as you were for OpenServer.
In OpenServer, getty looks like this:

$ ls -lL /etc/getty
---x------   1 bin      bin        59128 Jun  1  2001 /etc/getty
$

So, currently, I don't know how this could be exploited. It might be
more fruitful if you tried these tests as "nouser". It is true,
however, that getty does have a buffer overflow the way you invoked
it, and for that reason it needs to be fixed, and will be.

        Andrew


On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 06:09:21PM -0500, KF wrote:
Ok this is about down to shits and giggles...I would assume about
anything 
with getty in its name COULD have the same issue... how this is
abused... 
who knows at the moment...But these also suffer from the command line
overflow. 

[root@linux elguapo]# uugetty `perl -e 'print "A"x 9000'`
Segmentation fault (core dumped)

[root@linux elguapo]# mgetty `perl -e 'print "A"x 9000'`
Segmentation fault (core dumped)


-KF


KF wrote:

Why do we care... because I am joe schmoe_cant_code_a_lick_of_c and I
make retarded mistakes
in my code. (Stupid examples follow).
#include <stdio.h>
void main(int *argc, char **argv)
{
        char *runme[2];
        setuid(0);
        setgid(0);
        runme[0] = argv[1];
        runme[1] = 0;
        execve("/sbin/getty", runme, 0);
}

For that matter...m4 is a userland non-privileged level program ... yet
it led to a man exploit.
Flames > /dev/null ... comments welcome.

-KF

fish stiqz wrote:

My question.. why do we care if a userland non-privileged program has
a trivial buffer overflow vulnerability?  This seems like a complete
waste of time.  Who cares???!?!?!

--
fish stiqz <fish () synnergy net>
Synnergy Networks: http://www.synnergy.net/



Current thread: