On 27 Mar 2008, at 23:24, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Sergio Cuéllar Valdés dijo [Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 04:00:00PM -0600]:
>> Hi Gunnar,
>>
>> I think it should be moved to /usr/bin, for the reason you have
>> exposed. But if the -p is not implemented yet, the default port is
>> still 80 in the example you gave. But you cannot bind that port as
>> normal user ? Can you ?
>
> No, you cannot yet bind. But I believe in Álvaro's word - Trust him,
> he will fix this ;-)

I committed the fix yesterday night. It is part of trunk and branch/ 
0.6 now.

Anyway, what an unprivileged user could have done so far was to create  
a local configuration file by executing "cherokee-admin -C $HOME/ 
cherokee.conf"; then he could have configured a high port, and  
executed the server without a problem.

> I'm just plaing a bit with the security implications... Say, Joe
> Random User gets a shell account in your shared host, and just to test
> it, runs «cherokee -r / -p 1025». Maybe there should be a switch
> somewhere (i.e. in a non-ignored part of the configuration?) that
> allows the administrator to deny such requests? Or we should trust
> that every user effectively will find a creative way to expose
> whatever he has rights to see, and the only weapon against such abuse
> is human-level policy and user education?

You could do that in an infinite number of ways. I mean, how many  
python lines could take to write a script that packs the whole root  
directory and sends it through a socket? No more than four or five  
lines, actually.

The operating system itself is which allows/denies programs to perform  
certain actions. Eg: ports < 1024, chroot(), setgroups(), etc.  
Everything else is fine, and in fact, there is no standard way to  
track whether a user executes the 'dumper' script I was talking about.

A flat user executing cherokee is no more dangerous than the same user  
having access to a python/perl/ruby interpreters or even to a  
compiler.  IMHO trying to prevent the user for executing the web  
server would be a wrong take at security. OpenSolaris' RBAC or SE- 
Linux look much more like the solution to the problem to me.

--
Greetings, alo.

_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
[email protected]
http://cherokee-project.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cherokee

Reply via email to