[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150813164420.GA19101@openwall.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 19:44:20 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: djm@...drot.org, Moritz Jodeit <moritz@...efrostsecurity.de>
Cc: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: CVE request - OpenSSH 6.9 PAM privilege separation vulnerabilities
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:20:04AM +0200, Moritz Jodeit wrote:
> On 12.08.2015 22:48, Solar Designer wrote:
> > Are systems with "keyboard interactive" and "challenge-response"
> > authentication disabled (all of PAMAuthenticationViaKbdInt,
> > KbdInteractiveAuthentication, and ChallengeResponseAuthentication, as
> > applicable to a given sshd version, set to no) affected by these issues
> > as well? The code appears to be specific to this mode, but it isn't
> > immediately clear whether or not these configuration settings prevent
> > the vulnerable code from being reached in the privsep monitor even when
> > the privsep child is compromised. If the settings do not currently
> > prevent the code from being reached (I hope they do), then this should
> > be corrected as a hardening measure.
>
> As long as UsePAM is enabled in the configuration, all the PAM-related
> monitor requests can be send to the monitor. This at least allows
> triggering the use-after-free even if all the settings you mentioned
> are set to "no". Not sure if a full authentication is possible in this
> case though.
Damien, are you reading this? Looks like there's a hardening change for
you(?) to implement. Please comment. Thanks!
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.
