Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 23:34:31 -0800 From: "Crist J. Clark" <cjclark@reflexnet.net> To: "J.A. Terranson" <measl@mfn.org> Cc: security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: chflags/symlinks Message-ID: <20010321233431.C574@cjc-desktop.users.reflexcom.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103200548140.24537-100000@greeves.mfn.org>; from measl@mfn.org on Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:57:23AM -0600 References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103200548140.24537-100000@greeves.mfn.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:57:23AM -0600, J.A. Terranson wrote:
>
> Good Morning/Afternoon/Etc.,
>
> I believe there is an issue WRT the above pair.
The chflags(1) manpage says,
Symbolic links do not have flags, so unless the -H or -L option is set,
chflags on a symbolic link always succeeds and has no effect.
> Problem: There is no way to secure (schg, etc) the link. I can
> secure the files to which they point, but not the links
> themselves. Theoretically, an attack can be launched by deleting the
> symlinks and creating new ones, rather than altering the files directly
> (as they are safe under securelevel 3).
>
> For us, the issue has been nighty cleanup routines killing the
> symlinks, and thereby breaking *everything* :-(
>
>
> I there is something I have missed here, I would *love* to know...
You can schg the directory in which the symlinks are in. That of
course may or may not be practical for you.
--
Crist J. Clark cjclark@alum.mit.edu
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010321233431.C574>