Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 24 Feb 1997 17:20:23 -0700 (MST)
From:      Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com>
To:        Adrian Chadd <adrian@cougar.aceonline.com.au>
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org, auditors@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: disallow setuid root shells?
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.95.970224171452.14441E-100000@alive.znep.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.93.970225064152.11428A-100000@cougar.aceonline.com.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Adrian Chadd wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Feb 1997, Nate Johnson wrote:
> 
> > %well the security audit should pick up any new suid files each night,
> > 
> > Except the case where the hacker truly knows what they're doing, in which
> > case, the security audit will be worthless.  root can modify any files he
> > wants, including the database used to compare suid files against. =(
> > 
> 
> An extension of what I said before - what about logging ALL setuid
> programs? And not in the program source (of course), but in the kernel?
> Tis just an idea.
> 
> Btw - yes I know adduser isn't suid, sorry, I just woke up .. now I've had
> my coffee things are clearer. :)

process accounting sortof does that:

lastcomm: (after enabling process accounting, of course)

passwd     -S      marcs    ttyp1      0.09 secs Mon Feb 24 17:14

The S says used superuser privs.  That is only a partial implementation,
though, since process accounting logs aren't the nicest to log remotely,
they contain a whole lot of other programs, and the S flag is only set if
something the process calls suser(); ie. something it calls ends up
resulting in suser being called by something.  A lot can be done without
doing that.

Process accounting may be something to start for that type of logging.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.970224171452.14441E-100000>