Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 14:53:44 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas <charon@hades.hell.gr> To: Spidey <beaupran@iro.umontreal.ca> Cc: Omachonu Ogali <oogali@intranova.net>, Alexander Langer <alex@big.endian.de>, Jonathan Fortin <jonf@revelex.com>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sh? Message-ID: <20000120145344.A352@hades.hell.gr> In-Reply-To: <14470.2714.445315.624901@anarcat.dyndns.org> References: <14467.56256.337327.619067@anarcat.dyndns.org> <Pine.BSF.4.10.10001172254020.97329-100000@hydrant.intranova.net> <14470.2714.445315.624901@anarcat.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 19, 2000 at 02:03:54PM -0500, Spidey wrote: > > Yes, but you'll have to patch every single shell... Unless the > attacker is not aware of the mesure. It is too simple to change an > exploit code to use (say) csh instead of sh. Even then, one could > exploit other executables. And then, there is perl, awk, sed, hell even ghostscript can be used to read from and write to files. I think that by trying to patch the programs themselves to avoid execution of certain programs, we're trying to solve the specific instance, forgetting about the general case. > I would favor more the idea of implementing this in the kernel... ACLs would be nice, thank you. Ciao. -- Giorgos Keramidas, < keramida @ ceid . upatras . gr > "Don't let your schooling interfere with your education." [Mark Twain] 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?20000120145344.A352>