Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Apr 2003 10:21:56 +0400 | From | Vitaly <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] new syscall: flink |
| |
On 7 Apr 2003 06:43:40 GMT daw@mozart.cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner) wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >Here is a better piece of sample code that actually shows a > >permissions violation happening: > > > >[...] > >mkdir("testdir", 0700) = 0 > >open("testdir/testfile", O_WRONLY|O_CREAT|O_TRUNC, 0666) = 3 > >write(3, "Ansiktsburk\n", 12) = 12 > >close(3) = 0 > >open("testdir/testfile", O_RDONLY) = 3 > >chmod("testdir", 0) = 0 > >open("/proc/self/fd/3", O_RDWR) = 4 > >write(4, "Tjo fidelittan hatt!\n", 21) = 21 > > You're right! Good point. I retract the comments in my previous email. > (I did try an experiment like this, but apparently not the right one.) > > My conclusion: /proc/*/fd is a security hole. It should be fixed. > Do you agree? open("/proc/self/fd/3", O_RDWR) -- i thought, it just makes a copy for fd/3, and fd/3 should have the same permissions as it was opened.
> - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |