full-disclosure - Re: Linux Local Root -- CVE-2012-0056 -- Detailed Write-up

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 19:37:39 +0100
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To: noloader@...il.com
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Linux Local Root -- CVE-2012-0056 -- Detailed
	Write-up

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 10:10, Jeffrey Walton <noloader@...il.com> wrote:

> Does ptrace defeat -fPIE?
>
>
 No. When I find the offset via ptrace, I do this in a different /bin/su
than the one I eventually use for injection. This is because when you
ptrace an executable, if it is SUID, it will *drop* its SUIDness if it's
being ptraced. This is an obvious security enhancement. Since ptrace allows
you to write arbitrary memory, if this wasn't in place, then this attack
would have been trivial long ago.

Because I ptrace one /bin/su and inject on another, PIE still deters the
attack, because the addresses will be different each time.

What ptracing does provide over the objdump approach is that it allows you
to determine the offset without having read access to the suid executable,
which is something required for some security conscious distributions, for
example, Gentoo.

Content of type "text/html" skipped

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/