[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AE22C74.4000008@lightwave.net.ru>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:21:40 +0400
From: Dan Yefimov <dan@...htwave.net.ru>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: /proc filesystem allows bypassing directory permissions on Linux
On 24.10.2009 2:05, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sat 2009-10-24 01:12:51, Dan Yefimov wrote:
>> On 24.10.2009 0:35, Matthew Bergin wrote:
>>> doesnt look like the original owner is trying to write to it. Shows it
>>> cant, it had guest write to it via the proc folders bad permissions.
>>> Looks legitimate
>>>
>> Please tell me, who issued 'chmod 0666 unwritable_file'? Was that an
>> attacker? No, that was the owner of 'unwritable_file', nobody else.
>> What the 0666 file mode means? It means, that everybody can write to
>> the file, can't he? So why do you believe that pretension
>> legitimate?
>
> Original owner did chmod 666... after making sure traditional unix
> permissions protect the file. Please look at original mail; it was
> subtle but I believe I got it right, and file would not be writable
> with /proc unmounted.
>
I remember the original mail content. You're right, you can't reach the file if
the procfs is not mounted, but you forget about the race, allowing the guest to
create a hardlink to the file in an unrestricted location before the directory
access becomes restricted. Again, procfs is just another, specific kind of
hardlinks.
--
Sincerely Your, Dan.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists