On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 14:55 +0000, David Wagner wrote:
> Alexander Nyberg wrote:
> >tor 2005-06-09 klockan 02:59 +0000 skrev David Wagner:
> >> [...] the sendmail attack [...]
> >
> >I'll look this up but it sounds very weird and I don't see how this
> >would happen with this change.
>
> Yup, it was a weird one indeed -- which is part of why I'm concerned.
> Take a look at the attack again, then re-read my message. Maybe my
> concerns will make more sense once you refresh your memory about the
> setuid capabilities attack? If not, feel free to ask again, and I'll
> try to elaborate. Here is a pointer to one description of that attack:
> http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~daw/papers/setuid-usenix02.pdf
> (jump straight to Section 7.1)
Thanks for the link, I wish I had that during the realtime LSM debate,
when people were actually recommending that jackd use setuid to grant RT
scheduling ability to clients.
Lee
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
