[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: ACL's?

Yes but, if I can limit who can even use the program
on my system I don't have to worry about somebody
running it only so they can attempt to break root.
Also, I have greater faith in the OBSD developers than
I do in some of the others but, it still remains that
there might be some programs owned by root that are
suid that still might contain some unforseen 
vulnerablity. (many other flavours of UNIX seem to pass
out suid root willy nilly with out any thought that
the program in question may not even need it in the
first place. And if you question them about it they
just say "that's just the way it is". I'm not implying
this about the OBSD team of couse.)
But there still may be other flaws in my plan. I might
be gaining only a little extra protection at the
expense of a lot of extra administration.
Still open to comments.


--- David Terrell <dbt_(_at_)_meat_(_dot_)_net>
> wrote:
>Except then ping can't give up its root privilege once its bound
>its raw socket, because it doesn't know who you are.
>The difficulties and issues in writing secure setuid programs are,
>despite the FUD, well understood and documented.  You just have to
>read and do it right.

Boy, that's a pretty big "just" that an awful lot
of very smart people have gotten wrong over the years.

>David Terrell            | But remember that "layman" is just a polite 
>dbt_(_at_)_meat_(_dot_)_net             | word for "idiot." 
>http://wwn.nebcorp.com/  |  - Neal Stephenson

                           to a doctor of medicine, you
                           are a layman. does that make
                           you an idiot ;-) were all
                           laymen at something.

Visit these sites today
Blink 182 Fan Site - www.blink182.co.nz
NZ Skateboarding - www.nzskate.com