|
|
BugTraq
Samba 3.x + kernel 2.6.x local root vulnerability Feb 09 2004 09:23PM Michal Medvecky (M Medvecky sh cvut cz) (3 replies) Re: Samba 3.x + kernel 2.6.x local root vulnerability Feb 10 2004 12:07AM Felipe Franciosi (ozzybugt terra com br) Re: Samba 3.x + kernel 2.6.x local root vulnerability Feb 09 2004 10:24PM Michael Kjorling (michael kjorling com) Re: Samba 3.x + kernel 2.6.x local root vulnerability Feb 09 2004 10:03PM Seth Arnold (sarnold wirex com) (2 replies) Re: Samba 3.x + kernel 2.6.x local root vulnerability Feb 09 2004 11:07PM Patrick J. Volkerding (security slackware com) |
|
Privacy Statement |
> On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 10:23:03PM +0100, Michal Medvecky wrote:
>
> I haven't got a clue what you're trying to accomplish. If you don't want
> a setuid execute, DON'T RUN chmod +s! You don't even need samba to
> accomplish this:
>
>
> I expect this behaviour out of every Linux, BSD, commercial Unix,
> Windows NT with POSIX emulation, QNX, etc.
>
> Can you please explain what specifically bothers you?
I think his point is this:
Image you have a user account luser on box foo. You do not have root on
foo. However, you do have root on box bar. If you are allowed to
smbmount stuff on foo as user luser, (which is a BadThing(tm), but
default behaviour on some systems as it seems), and you smbmount a share
on bar, and use that suid shell, you actually have root control on foo!
Kind Regards,
Frank Louwers
--
Openminds bvba www.openminds.be
Tweebruggenstraat 16 - 9000 Gent - Belgium
[ reply ]