Fred K Ollinger on Sat, 15 Jun 2002 20:10:14 +0200 |
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 04:59:46PM -0500, Sean Finney wrote: > > someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there might be some security > > implications of using system(3). > > Well, provided that the string you pass to system(3) isn't > user-supplied, the only real problem is that you're presuming that the > binary you call is the right thing. You can give system(3) a full > path, but I can just chroot(8) before calling your binary, so that > saves you from broken PATHs but not from real exploits. (Ah. Yes, > you say all that below. Whoops.) The user does supply one of the strings, but I'm not going to do a system b/c I don't know how to get that to work easily w/ a pointer to a char array. > Writing safe suid/sgid binaries is EXTREMELY difficult, and > something noone without a really good understanding of how the Unix > permissions structure works should consider attempting. (That is, I This is an installer that has to run as root. It's so alpha, someone would have to be a real masocist to try it out, but it does warn the user of such. :) I all ready screwed lots of things up on my computer testing it out. Thanks for all the help on this. Fred ______________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|