[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJ_zFkKbDjzmK0F_+t6Qzeoh94ktrxLU_kfei_FehhGmUOS=GA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 12:39:21 -0700
From: Tavis Ormandy <taviso@...gle.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>, chet.ramey@...e.edu
Subject: Re: CVE-2014-6271: remote code execution through bash
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@...e.edu> wrote:
> On 9/25/14, 12:15 PM, Solar Designer wrote:
>
>> What do you think of distros' going with Florian's prefix-suffix patch
>> right now? I think it breaks function imports/exports between
>> pre-patch and post-patch bash versions, but keeps them intact for
>> patched versions. Right? If so, this sounds acceptable for immediate
>> use by distros. Do you agree?
>
> I haven't looked at that particular patch in detail yet, but I am wondering
> why adding both a prefix and a suffix is better than just adding a prefix.
>
I think it's just paranoia, it demonstrates significant enough control
over the environment that it's unlikely someone could construct it via
a naive cgi environment or similar. If someone can create variables
with an arbitrary suffix and prefix, then there are likely bigger
problems to worry about than what bash is doing. FWIW, I like
Florian's approach.
Tavis.
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.
