bugtraq - Re: COSEINC Linux Advisory #1: Linux Kernel Parent Process Death Signal Vulnerability

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 15:02:49 +0400 (MSD)
From: Dan Yefimov <dan@...5.lightwave.net.ru>
To: Glynn Clements <glynn@...ements.plus.com>
Cc: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: COSEINC Linux Advisory #1: Linux Kernel Parent Process Death
 Signal Vulnerability

On Fri, 17 Aug 2007, Glynn Clements wrote:

> There definitely appears to be potential for DoS against system-wide
> resources.
> 
Only the potential. In most cases that potential will remain unimplemented
since there are only a few setuid binaries in the system, so the real DoS
attack may be either impossible or bring a too tiny harm like impossibility for 
users to change their passwords or finger information. Several posters already 
talked here about the need to provide a PoC exploit that will work for at least 
10% cases before raising an alarm. The security implication of this bug is in 
fact rather theoretical than practical. Nobody yet talked here that this is not 
a bug to be fixed. The original poster just raised a false alarm here. That is 
what I talk about.
	BTW, many setuid root binaries like /bin/su don't even issue setuid(0) 
and work under RUID of the calling user (but they do issue setuid(<UID of 
authenticated user>) before executing either shell or program as a child),
which means in turn that they can be easily killed in a usual way.
-- 

    Sincerely Your, Dan.