Re: pingflood.c

From: Niall Smart (njs3at_private)
Date: Mon May 18 1998 - 13:06:08 PDT

  • Next message: Ton Hospel: "Re: simple kde exploit fix"

    On May 18, 12:46pm, Theo de Raadt wrote:
    } Subject: Re: pingflood.c
    > > BTW, how many setuid programs are there that will catch various
    > > signals and will behave "not-as-expected" when forked off by a
    > > signal-bomber parent process, such as pingflood?
    >
    > Unlike seemingly everone else in this thread, who are very busy trying
    > to patch ping for a problem which it is obvious many other programs in
    > the source tree will also encounter, Aggelos has taken the first step
    > and used started thinking about the further consequences.
    [snip]
    > For more information on how I have fixed this problem, due to a
    > conversation with David Holland a couple months back about this basic
    > problem, see both www.openbsd.org/security.html#23 and
    > www.openbsd.org/errata.html#kill
    
    I would have also thought it advisable to prevent a non-priviledged
    user from sending a signal to a set[ug]id process which has installed
    a handler for that signal.
    
    Niall
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 13:54:11 PDT