[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070614150055.GB13222@caesar.cse.nd.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 09:00:55 -0600
From: Kyle Wheeler <kyle-bugtraq@...oryhole.net>
To: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Sudo: local root compromise with krb5 enabled
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Monday, June 11 at 06:52 PM, quoth Ken Raeburn:
>> But sudo has a curious bug: it *tries* to do the second step, but
>> if that step fails because no local service keys are known, it lets
>> the user become root anyway, because the (potentially fake)
>> Kerberos server said so. For example, on a host without a "keytab"
>> file:
>
> In some MIT applications there was a conscious choice to that
> effect. The MIT library's interface for verifying credentials has a
> flag that can be set to indicate whether it should return success or
> failure for this specific case. (Though personally, I think the
> default should be the more paranoid one, it would be an incompatible
> break from previous versions.)
Maybe I'm misunderstanding here, but so what? This sounds like the
equivalent of this:
My program respects the $ALLOW_ROOT_COMPROMISE environment
variable. You may think root compromises are bad, and that the
environment variable is ludicrous, and I agree (that "feature" was
added before I took over), but if I removed it then that would be
an incompatible break from previous versions.
Just because older programs allowed it doesn't make it sacrosanct.
~Kyle
- --
The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, "Behold, a
glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!" Yet
wisdom is justified by her deeds.
-- Matthew 11:19
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Thank you for using encryption!
iD8DBQFGcVgnBkIOoMqOI14RAkmTAJ9rcBKhRxGyZSeLRgxMnVsmG0GmEwCfYxY0
ZFXlNYUuE3wadtEWnAVF7Iw=
=JdRA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Powered by blists - more mailing lists