--On Friday, July 25, 2003 09:37:04 +0200 Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
