[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080516215000.GA3801@openwall.com>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 01:50:00 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: OpenSSH key blacklisting
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 09:36:06PM +0200, Robert Buchholz wrote:
> Gentoo is discussing the feature in bug #221759 [1]. Until now, I have
> not heard a reaction to the patch from our OpenSSH maintainers, so I
> cannot judge on the technical side of the inclusion.
Thanks for the "bug" reference. FWIW, the shell script in this comment
is vulnerable itself, in more than one way:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=221759#c9
For example, it lets a user have any other user's or root's
authorized_keys removed, by replacing .ssh with a symlink to someone
else's .ssh directory. It's just bad practice to access users' files as
root (or as another user); this is difficult to do safely.
Also, it misses authorized_keys2.
> I assume whichever version has the acceptance of the OpenSSH upstream is
> what most of us would be willing to go with. Did you discuss either
> blacklist format with them already?
Yes, very briefly. They don't intend to implement key blacklisting.
I suspect that a worm might change this, though. ;-)
> Personally, I would like to see the feature ported to our distribution
> sooner than later, but neither at the cost of maintaining patchsets for
> the rest of existance, nor with high transition cost once upstream
> accepts another format.
Well, this is difficult to predict correctly.
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
