lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectI QUIT (Re: TO HELL WITH IT THEN......(re: disk-destroyer.c))

No Bart,

Let them eat cake ............

The patch has been pulled .........

On Fri, 21 Jul 2000, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Jul 2000, Khimenko Victor wrote:
>
> > In <Pine.LNX.4.21.0007212009040.5384-100000@tricky> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz (dake@staszic.waw.pl) wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 21 Jul 2000, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 21 Jul 2000, Ove Ewerlid wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > I like Andre's perfectionist approach at the protocol level.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> Now to restate that it is possible to push the shellstack with the
> > >> mini-code that is called disk-destroyer.c with out being root and wax your
> > >> system. I hate having to expose everything, but now the hackers of the
> > >> world know now to take down Linux Boxes one by one.
> > >>
> > >> You now have no choice, the security issue is exposed.
> > >>
> > >> Andre Hedrick
> > >> The Linux ATA/IDE guy
> >
> > > ...damn... I'm a bit tired of this discussion...
> >
> > > Andre, are you trying to say that you don't need to have r00t to make
> > > some hdd-barbecue? If so wouldn't Linus have applied the patch? It's
> > > obvious that you can make silly things mixing some holes and d-destroyer.c
> > > Your patch is helpful, but it's "security through obscurity", you can
> > > still fry hdd after getting r00t, only diffirence will be a bigger exploit
> > > and more time wasted on writing it...
> >
> > Not much more. Really. Some pattern-serach over /dev/kmem will help for sure :-)
> > It's stupid thing to try "security through obscurity" when the whole source
> > code is exposed to world.
>
> yes
>
> >
> > > you are exaggerating or you can't clearly explain what do you mean...
> > > but patch should go in anyway...
> >
> > I don't think so. This patch is small and non-intrusive, so perhaps it's Ok
> > to add it to kernel but still it buys you effectively nothing so waht's the
> > point ?
>
> It will stop this thread and make Andre happy and relaxed :-)
> seriously speaking as Andre said this patch prevents accidental hdd frying
> by clumsy root...
>
> >
> > > BTW: software may (but don't have to) damage BIOSes, firmwares, CPUs
> > > (programming PLL on mobo), older monitors, ISA/PCI cards (programming
> > > southbridge to get ISA/11Mhz and PCI/41.5Mhz)... etc...
> > > just imagine advanced worm (similar to the one discribed in some
> > > lcamtuf's project) making use of all hardware "features"... ugh...
> >
> > > The ONE and ONLY solution is r00t without direct access to hardware...
> >
> > Yeah. Hmm. Looks like I can userstood now: if direct access to hardware
> > (and to /dev/kmem, of course) is disabled (some router or firewall so
> > capabilities are removed from system) but you STILL need HDIO_DRIVE_CMD
> > then yes, in this RARE scenario this patch is usefull. Huh. Someone knows
> > at least ONE system in such configuration and with such need ?
> >
>
> I'm sure there are some...
>
> --
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
> <bkz@linux-ide.org>
>

Andre Hedrick
The Linux ATA/IDE guy


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.099 / U:6.436 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site