Messages in this thread |  | | From | (David Wagner) | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] User chroot | | Date | 27 Jun 2001 00:51:32 GMT |
| |
Paul Menage wrote: >It could potentially be useful for a network daemon (e.g. a simplified >anonymous FTP server) that wanted to be absolutely sure that neither it >nor any of its libraries were being tricked into following a bogus >symlink, or a "/../" in a passed filename. After initialisation, the >daemon could chroot() into its data directory, and safely only serve >the set of files within that directory hierarchy. > >This could be regarded as the wrong way to solve such a problem, but >this kind of bug seems to be occurring often enough on BugTraq that it >might be useful if you don't have the resources to do a full security >audit on your program (or if the source to some of your libraries >isn't available).
Or even where you have done a full security audit on your program, it is often still useful to have backup protection. Belt and suspenders[*], and all that.
[*] For those who are not familiar with the reference: If you really, really want to avoid getting caught with your pants down, you might wear both a belt and a pair of suspenders. - 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/
|  |