[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-12 Thread coderpunk
On 9/11/06, Joe Feise [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: coderpunk writes: The standard recommendation is to never compile the kernel as root. Which obviously doesn't help you when a non-root user edits the kernel, you compile it as 'jerry' but still have to install it as 'root'. You're still

Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-12 Thread Chris Umphress
On 9/12/06, coderpunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The standard recommendation is to never compile the kernel as root. Which obviously doesn't help you when a non-root user edits the kernel, you compile it as 'jerry' but still have to install it as 'root'. You're still hosed. Geez, of

[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-11 Thread coderpunk
On 9/8/06, Gerald (Jerry) Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hadmut Danisch wrote: Hi, there's a severe vulnerability in the Linux kernel source code archives: It is my understanding that the permissions are intentionally set that way. This hash

[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-11 Thread Joe Feise
coderpunk writes: The standard recommendation is to never compile the kernel as root. Which obviously doesn't help you when a non-root user edits the kernel, you compile it as 'jerry' but still have to install it as 'root'. You're still hosed. Geez, of course not. Unpacking the kernel

Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-09 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 23:37:31 +0200, Hadmut Danisch said: Again: There is no such advice. The README just says To do the actual install you have to be root, but none of the normal build should require that. So you don't need to be root in order to compile. But this is not an advice to

[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-08 Thread Roland Kuhn
Hi Hadmut! On 7 Sep 2006, at 20:23, Hadmut Danisch wrote: Hi, there's a severe vulnerability in the Linux kernel source code archives: The Linux kernel is distributed as tar archives in the form of linux-2.6.17.11.tar.bz2 from kernel.org. It is usually unpacked, configured and compiled

[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-08 Thread Hadmut Danisch
On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 10:55:32AM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: It is my understanding that the permissions are intentionally set that way. yup, it's not accidently, it set intentionally. But intention does not imply security. This hash been discussed several times over the

[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-08 Thread Gerald (Jerry) Carter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hadmut Danisch wrote: Hi, there's a severe vulnerability in the Linux kernel source code archives: It is my understanding that the permissions are intentionally set that way. This hash been discussed several times over the past year.

[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-08 Thread Gerald (Jerry) Carter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hadmut Danisch wrote: On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 10:55:32AM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: It is my understanding that the permissions are intentionally set that way. yup, it's not accidentally, it set intentionally. But intention does

[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-08 Thread Hadmut Danisch
Hi Jerry, On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 12:06:41PM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: So how would you do make install make modules_install Building and install are separate operations. Really? Both means to do what is standing in the Makefile. Both is executing the Makefile.

[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-08 Thread Gerald (Jerry) Carter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hadmut Danisch wrote: Really? Both means to do what is standing in the Makefile. Both is executing the Makefile. That's like saying ping should run as root since it reads /etc/hosts. If you cannot trust the kernel source to compile it as

Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-08 Thread Jurjen Oskam
On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 08:17:05PM +0200, Hadmut Danisch wrote: It may sound funny to consider tar as the wrong tool, but it is. Don't. Untar. Archives. As. Root. It's that simple. Or are you also going to complain about the fact that there are tar versions out there that don't strip a

[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-08 Thread Hadmut Danisch
On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:38:00PM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: Your logic is false here. If the kernel maintainers and developers say don't compile as root and you do it anyways, That's your choice. Your assumption is false here. The kernel maintainers DO NOT say this: Read the

Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-08 Thread Michael Gale
Most people who compile software do so as a normal user, not as root. You can not expect every piece of software to explicitly state do not be root. It is not the developers who dictate who can compile software, it is good form for them to make it so a normal user can compile software and

[Full-disclosure] Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

2006-09-08 Thread Hadmut Danisch
Hi Roland, On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 11:16:35AM +0200, Roland Kuhn wrote: Hi Hadmut! This is a FAQ, and a pretty lame one; see e.g. the first google hit for 'linux kernel tarball permissions': http://www.gatago.com/linux/kernel/6136874.html 1. If this is a known issue and it is *still*