bugtraq - Re: [Full-disclosure] Vim: Insecure Temporary File Creation During Build: Arbitrary Code Execution

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, 26 Jul 2008 13:33:24 +0100
From: "Jan Minář" <rdancer@...ncer.org>
To: "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>
Cc: "Robert Buchholz" <rbu@...too.org>, vim-dev@....org,
	full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com,
	bugs@....org
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Vim: Insecure Temporary File Creation During Build: Arbitrary Code Execution

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Steven M. Christey
<coley@...us.mitre.org> wrote:
>
> 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.

I stand corrected.  I have updated the advisory.  Thanks, Robert.
Thanks to Steven for rephrasing.

Jan.