home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: Stephen Usher <steve@earth.ox.ac.uk>
- Subject: Re: seduid scripts
- Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 13:09:08 BST
- In-Reply-To: <9303231257.AA00672@irz204.inf.tu-dresden.de>; from "Michael Hohmuth" at Mar 23, 93 1:57 pm
-
- >Steve writes:
- >
- >> > [about /bin/scripter]
- >>
- >> This sounds an even more unholy mess than one incidence of / -> \ conversion
- >> in the kernel! Anyway, it's just one more security hole, not that there
- >> aren't one or two already! :-)
- >
- >Why is that an security hole? `/bin/scripter' would be just another shell
- >which happens to be setuid-root (just like `su').
-
- It's just one more program which could be compromised.
-
- >
- >IMHO, having a script launcher is better than putting inconsistencies
- >in the kernel.
-
- Exec should preferably be an atomic action. Also, there is an implicit
- assumption that you hold your executables in /bin. What if the script is for
- something other than /bin/[c]sh, maybe you want to run /exec/bloggs/gruncher
- and don't have a /bin on the current drive? Putting the parsing of the #!
- magic number in the kernel would make the kernel self contained, and hence
- less able to be totally fouled up by the half-clued or clueless.
-
- You can never under estimate the intelligence of a user! :-)
-
- >
- >Michael
- >--
- >Internet: hohmuth@freia.inf.tu-dresden.de
- >
-
- Steve
-
- --
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Computer Systems Administrator, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Oxford University.
- E-Mail: steve@uk.ac.ox.earth (JANET) steve@earth.ox.ac.uk (Internet).
- Tel:- Oxford (0865) 282110 (UK) or +44 865 282110 (International).
-