Gentoo Archives: gentoo-hardened

From: pageexec@××××××××.hu
To: gentoo-hardened@l.g.o, Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-hardened] Exploitable Weakness: Shared Memory
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:54:48
Message-Id: 417054DE.20635.2F7CA157@localhost
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-hardened] Exploitable Weakness: Shared Memory by Mike Frysinger
1 > > as was said already, it's not an exploit per se, it's a hacking technique
2 > > to stay on an already compromised box. /dev/shm is a tmpfs filesystem, you
3 > > can check your 'mount' output or /etc/fstab. most likely it isn't mounted
4 > > with the noexec (let alone nodev, nosuid, etc) options so it serves as an
5 > > ideal hiding place (as in, many people don't think of it as a general
6 > > purpose storage place).
7 >
8 > on that note, is there any reason to not mount /dev/shm by default with all
9 > these options you listed ?
10
11 honestly, i don't know, but you can just try it and see what breaks.
12 however if you want to turn 'noexec' mounts into a securing method
13 then you'll have to revamp the filesystems completely, not unlike how
14 PaX does it with memory access control: separate the writable (by a
15 potential attacker) filesystems from the executable ones (i.e., those
16 mounted without noexec). of course this gives you a very coarse grained
17 control over what the user can execute vs. write to, if you need more
18 then you'll need some kind of access control mechanism, there's a few
19 of them in the hardened subproject, choose one that fits your
20 requirements best (based on granularity vs. usability vs. whatever
21 you care about).
22
23
24 --
25 gentoo-hardened@g.o mailing list