[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: exec and EXECSERVERS
From: |
Thomas Bushnell, BSG |
Subject: |
Re: exec and EXECSERVERS |
Date: |
19 Dec 2002 15:52:12 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 |
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <ams@kemisten.nu> writes:
> > What was the reason for disabling EXECSERVERS in exec? I think that
> > it is quite an useful feature when debugging exec, or playing around
> > with new features for it.
>
> This[1] thread might interest you.
>
> [1] http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/bug-hurd/2000-May/001211.html
>
> Interesting. Roland and/or Thomas, could you comment on the possible
> security risks, if any such existed with EXECSERVERS?
Well, a setuid exec itself should disable EXECSERVERS. But the
environment variable might still get inherited, and seven layers of
fork/exec later, do something nasty. So that means that setuid exec
should in fact clear EXECSERVERS in the passed environment.
That's a nasty wart, however, having the *exec server* go mucking
around with environment variables.
- exec and EXECSERVERS, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2002/12/19
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/12/19
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Neal H. Walfield, 2002/12/19
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2002/12/19
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS,
Thomas Bushnell, BSG <=
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Paul Jarc, 2002/12/19
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/12/19
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Paul Jarc, 2002/12/19
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/12/20
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Paul Jarc, 2002/12/20
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/12/20
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Roland McGrath, 2002/12/20
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/12/20
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Roland McGrath, 2002/12/20
- Re: exec and EXECSERVERS, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/12/20