[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAG48ez3WHp2uiDf66obvtgz1eiGQDokNwCUeouXzUsqbF8oq_w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 20:08:32 +0200
From: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@...os.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, paul@...l-moore.com, jmorris@...ei.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, morgan@...nel.org,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] exec: Correct the permission check for unsafe exec
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 8:06 PM Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> wrote:
> Like, I think currently a setuid binary like this is probably (?) not
> exploitable:
>
> int main(void) {
> execl("/bin/echo", "echo", "hello world");
> }
(bleh, of course what I meant to write here was
`execl("/bin/echo", "echo", "hello world", NULL);`)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists