[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20031125123244.GB18349@dontpanic.ulm.ccc.de>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 13:32:44 +0100
From: vb@...tpanic.ulm.ccc.de
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: hard links on Linux create local DoS vulnerability and security problems
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 05:36:29PM +0100, Jakob Lell wrote:
> to another user. This hard link continues to exist even if the original file
> is removed by the owner. However, as the link still belongs to the original
> owner, it is still counted to his quota. If a malicious user creates hard
> links for every temp file created by another user, this can make the victim
> run out of quota (or even fill up the hard disk). This makes a local DoS
> attack possible.
Every *NIX filesystem has such links.
I cannot see a DoS-attack with that fact, because a user will address
his sysadmin with that problem. And the BOFH^Wsysadmin will then wag
a finger. The "attacker" has to be a local user also.
Of course, that is a design flow which is there because of the fact
that quotas were not implemented in the first UNIX filesystem versions.
> Furthermore, users can even create links to a setuid binary. If there is a
> security whole like a buffer overflow in any setuid binary, a cracker can
> create a hard link to this file in his home directory. This link still exists
> when the administrator has fixed the security whole by removing or replacing
> the insecure program. This makes it possible for a cracker to keep a security
> whole open until an exploit is available. It is even possible to create links
> to every setuid program on the system. This doesn't create new security
> wholes but makes it more likely that they are exploited.
No.
Only a beginner would ignore the link count for a file when removing it
for security reasons. Every *NIX admin with basic knowledge of UNIX or
Linux will not ignore it.
> I could reproduce the problem on linux 2.2.19 and 2.4.21 (and found nothing
> about it in the changelogs to 2.4.23-rc3). If you can check whether this
> problem also exists on other unix-like operating systems, please post the
> results.
This "problem" exists with all *NIX systems I know, but it is not
a big problem.
VB.
--
Volker Birk, Postfach 1540, 88334 Bad Waldsee, Germany
Phone +49 (7524) 912142, Fax +49 (7524) 996807, dingens@...ens.org
http://fdik.org, Deutsches IRCNet fdik!~c_vbirk@...a.rz.uni-ulm.de
PGP-Key: http://www.x-pie.de/vb.asc
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists