From owner-freebsd-security Mon Sep 11 19:53:23 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from nagual.pp.ru (pobrecita.freebsd.ru [194.87.13.42]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2943037B42C; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 19:53:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from ache@localhost) by nagual.pp.ru (8.11.0/8.11.0) id e8C2rE943198; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 06:53:14 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from ache) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 06:53:14 +0400 From: "Andrey A. Chernov" To: Mike Silbersack Cc: Kris Kennaway , Szilveszter Adam , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [paul@STARZETZ.DE: Breaking screen on BSD] Message-ID: <20000912065314.A43158@nagual.pp.ru> References: <20000912061357.A42654@nagual.pp.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from silby@silby.com on Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 09:28:56PM -0500 Organization: Biomechanoid Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 09:28:56PM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote: > > No, it is a new exploit based on execve behaviour and not related > > especially to screen, other programs can be affected too. We definitely > > need to fix execve. > > If it's new, why does it rely on corrupting VBELL as the previous screen > exploit did? Can this execve behavior be exploiting in a program which > wasn't broken by a buffer overflow or a format string bug? Screen 3.9.8 is not vulnerable to this. By "new" I mean part of it related to execve behaviour which is generally dangerous, not whole exploit at once. -- Andrey A. Chernov http://ache.pp.ru/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message