Bugtraq mailing list archives
Re: pingflood.c
From: njs3 () DOC IC AC UK (Niall Smart)
Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 21:06:08 +0100
On May 18, 12:46pm, Theo de Raadt wrote: } Subject: Re: pingflood.c
BTW, how many setuid programs are there that will catch various signals and will behave "not-as-expected" when forked off by a signal-bomber parent process, such as pingflood?Unlike seemingly everone else in this thread, who are very busy trying to patch ping for a problem which it is obvious many other programs in the source tree will also encounter, Aggelos has taken the first step and used started thinking about the further consequences.
[snip]
For more information on how I have fixed this problem, due to a conversation with David Holland a couple months back about this basic problem, see both www.openbsd.org/security.html#23 and www.openbsd.org/errata.html#kill
I would have also thought it advisable to prevent a non-priviledged user from sending a signal to a set[ug]id process which has installed a handler for that signal. Niall
Current thread:
- Re: pingflood.c Aggelos P. Varvitsiotis (May 18)
- Re: pingflood.c pedward () WEBCOM COM (May 18)
- Re: pingflood.c Jeffrey Hutzelman (May 18)
- Re: pingflood.c Phil Stracchino (May 18)
- root from file table overflows? Chris Conner (May 19)
- Re: pingflood.c Theo de Raadt (May 18)
- Re: pingflood.c sinster () DARKWATER COM (May 18)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: pingflood.c pedward () WEBCOM COM (May 18)
- Re: pingflood.c Niall Smart (May 18)
- Re: pingflood.c pedward () WEBCOM COM (May 18)