--On Friday, July 25, 2003 09:37:04 +0200 Peter Eisentraut
<peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> Larry Rosenman writes:
>
>> Universal Practice does NOT equal Security and Usability.
>>
>> Please consider what Kean is saying here.
>
> What Kean is saying is that your system is insecure if you have a setuid
> executable that references shared libraries with nonabsolute sonames and
> you have a system (an "older system") that contains a particular bug in
> its run-time dynamic loader that it obeys LD_LIBRARY_PATH for setuid
> executables. That is fairly common knowledge, and that's why
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH is ignored for setuid executables on all properly
> functioning operating systems.
>
> If your system is broken in that particular way, upgrade your system or
> don't use setuid programs at all. Those are the only sane choices. It is
> not an acceptable choice to disable all valid uses of nonabsolute sonames
> for all users, just because some users are running on broken systems with
> obvious security flaws.
I disagree STRONGLY with what you are saying here. What harm does it do to
add the ABILITY for a port to use a ABSOLUTE DT_SONAME?
All the SYSTEM SUPPLIED .so's on UnixWare use an absolute DT_SONAME, and I
feel
that we should build libpq to supply same on UnixWare, and Kean suggests
that
the prefered, SCO recommended way on OpenServer is to do the same.
I belive that the issue is not broken systems, but broken practice.
LER
--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
