From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Dec  3 19:10:16 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61D38106568B
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Thu,  3 Dec 2009 19:10:16 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jamie@bishopston.net)
Received: from pacha.mail.bishopston.net (pacha.mail.bishopston.net
	[IPv6:2001:5c0:1100:200::3])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3CB28FC08
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Thu,  3 Dec 2009 19:10:15 +0000 (UTC)
X-Catflap-Envelope-From: <jamie@catflap.bishopston.net>
X-Catflap-Envelope-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from catflap.bishopston.net (jamie@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by catflap.bishopston.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nB3JAE8n028481; 
	Thu, 3 Dec 2009 19:10:14 GMT
	(envelope-from jamie@catflap.bishopston.net)
Received: (from jamie@localhost)
	by catflap.bishopston.net (8.14.3/8.12.9/Submit) id nB3JAEKj028478;
	Thu, 3 Dec 2009 19:10:14 GMT
From: Jamie Landeg Jones <jamie@bishopston.net>
Message-Id: <200912031910.nB3JAEKj028478@catflap.bishopston.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:10:14 +0000
Organization: http://www.bishopston.com/jamie/
To: timo.schoeler@riscworks.net, freebsd-security@freebsd.org
References: <200912030930.nB39UhW9038238@freefall.freebsd.org>
	<4B179B90.10307@netfence.it>
	<8ABB1EE2-4521-40EC-9E85-4A0E771D6B7F@mac.com>
	<200912031837.nB3IbEKB036114@catflap.bishopston.net>
	<4B180B03.1040405@thedarkside.nl> <4B180C40.3040001@riscworks.net>
In-Reply-To: <4B180C40.3040001@riscworks.net>
User-Agent: Heirloom mailx 12.4 7/29/08
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2
	(catflap.bishopston.net [127.0.0.1]);
	Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:10:14 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.2 at catflap.bishopston.net
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Cc: 
Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-09:16.rtld
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:10:16 -0000

>
> On 12/03/2009 08:01 PM, Pieter de Boer wrote:
> > Jamie Landeg Jones wrote:
> >>
> >> However, I'd still apply the patch in case some other way to exploit
> >> the non-checking of the unsetenv return status crops up elsewhere.
> >>
> >> It can't do any harm.
> > 
> > The problem with that is, on 6.x, unsetenv() returns 'void', so there's
> > no return value to check on.

As Pieter pointed out, unsetenv returns 'void', so checking for a return
value (like that patch does) doesn't make sense.

Sorry for wasting your time - the patch is not necessary (and won't even work)
on 6.X systems, as you've discovered.

Your system is safe from this attack, and any related ones.

Jamie