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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.51.0807251156230.29569@faron.mitre.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:57:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>
To: Jan Minář <rdancer@...ncer.org>
Cc: Robert Buchholz <rbu@...too.org>, vim-dev@....org,
	full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com,
	bugs@....org, "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Vim: Insecure Temporary File Creation During
 Build: Arbitrary Code Execution


On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, [UTF-8] Jan MináÅ^Y wrote:

> > The commands do not have to be written there between (1) and (2), they
> > can be in the file long before the ./configure was started -- just
> > because the script does care whether it can write to the file at all.
> > So unlike stated in the advisory, and in CVE-2008-3294, the issue does
> > not involve a race condition if the attacker would choose to create a
> > 644 file.
>
> The file gets truncated in (1).  You're wrong, the advisory is right.

Maybe the point here is that if the attacker owns the file and sets 644
permissions, then the truncation won't happen since ./configure won't have
the permissions to modify the file.

- Steve

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ