[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <875xxsljax.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 19:23:02 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: "Skyler Ferrante (RIT Student)" <sjf5462@....edu>
Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab@...e.de>, Alejandro Colomar <alx@...nel.org>,
Thorsten Glaser <tg@...bsd.de>, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
musl@...ts.openwall.com, NRK <nrk@...root.org>, Guillem Jover
<guillem@...rons.org>, libc-alpha@...rceware.org,
libbsd@...ts.freedesktop.org, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Iker Pedrosa <ipedrosa@...hat.com>, Christian Brauner
<christian@...uner.io>
Subject: Re: Re: Tweaking the program name for <err.h> functions
* Skyler Ferrante:
> Hmm, maybe I'm missing something, but it seems you can close(fd) for
> the standard fds and then call execve, and the new process image will
> have no fd 0,1,2. I've tried this on a default Ubuntu 22.04 system.
> This seems to affect shadow-utils and other setuid/setgid binaries.
>
> Here is a repo I built for testing,
> https://github.com/skyler-ferrante/fd_omission/. What is the correct
> glibc behavior? Am I misunderstanding something?
If you run it under strace, it's not running SUID (in AT_SECURE mode).
I'm not saying we don't have bugs (although we do have some end-to-end
AT_SECURE tests in the testsuite, but probably not for this legacy
behavior), just that this approach to testing is questionable.
Thanks,
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
