Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Cc: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 1/2] bin/install-qa-check.d: add new 90bad-bin-owner QA check.
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 03:30:18
Message-Id: f2550da2-65c3-540e-bb14-65663b731566@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 1/2] bin/install-qa-check.d: add new 90bad-bin-owner QA check. by Ulrich Mueller
1 On 07/29/2018 09:16 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
2 >
3 > Staying with the man:man example, how would anybody become the "man"
4 > user, in the first place? That user has /bin/false as a shell and no
5 > valid password.
6
7 One way would be to exploit a process that's running as the "man" user.
8 Ostensibly such a thing is possible; otherwise we wouldn't be dropping
9 privileges in the first place.
10
11 The shell/password settings for that user are also in no way guaranteed.
12
13 But on principle: who cares, non-root users shouldn't be able to gain
14 root =)
15
16
17 > Setgid executables shouldn't be group writable
18
19 Why not? I'm happy to pull that part back out.