Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Glibc Dynamic Loader Hit By A Nasty Local Privilege Escalation Vulnerability

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by NotMine999 View Post

    If I had a nickel for every retort I have read on Moronix that suggests someone should write some code and submit that as a patch.
    rogerx

    ok, I admit it: it was a bad take!

    I'm just tired of people complaining for everything.

    Comment


    • #22
      If this worries you consider giving musl a chance

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by npwx View Post
        Looking at the code cited in the email, seriously, WTF? I'm not surprised they have security issues. Not a single helper functions for string parsing and manipulation, everything open coded while loops, checking *x for \0 etc. That looks like code from the 30 years ago, no wonder nobody spotted the bug in all that mess.
        It's very difficult to find bugs in code that you yourself write, let alone that someone else wrote a while ago.

        In this case the vulnerability has existed for 2 years and now there are reports of a vulnerability in ncurses.

        The claims around open source being more secure have always been nonsense, promoted and believed by those that do not understand how code works,

        God only knows how many other vulnerabilities exist that no one knows about.

        On the bright side, the actual impact is relatively minor, one needs local access to the system in order to gain full root privileges, and the reality is that even if they did get full root access, in a properly configured network, the amount of actual damage they could do would be relatively minor.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by sophisticles View Post
          The claims around open source being more secure have always been nonsense, promoted and believed by those that do not understand how code works,
          Fortunately, we don't have to rely on humans reading through it. Open source also means individuals and organizations can subject the code to various forms of static analysis. If they find bugs by that means or their own testing, they can also submit patches instead of merely bug reports, which makes it more likely the vulnerability gets fixed. In both respects, this is better than commercial software.

          The industry understands this, which is why all the big tech firms prefer to use open source as the foundation for their own systems and platforms - even Microsoft.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by cynic View Post

            rogerx

            ok, I admit it: it was a bad take!

            I'm just tired of people complaining for everything.
            shrugs.... stuff happens. more of a man than me to admit it! ;-)

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by coder View Post
              Fortunately, we don't have to rely on humans reading through it. Open source also means individuals and organizations can subject the code to various forms of static analysis. If they find bugs by that means or their own testing, they can also submit patches instead of merely bug reports, which makes it more likely the vulnerability gets fixed. In both respects, this is better than commercial software.

              The industry understands this, which is why all the big tech firms prefer to use open source as the foundation for their own systems and platforms - even Microsoft.
              We have seen how well this works, it took more than 10 years to fix a memory leak in Gnome that the developers claimed did not exist and/or could not replicate. despite the fact that every user of Gnome ran into it eventually.

              Let's not forget the vulnerability that existed for 35 years before anyone found it, this one that existed for years, and my personal favorite, the fork bomb that exists to this day, can be exploited on any Linux based OS in it's default configuration and can bring down a system in minutes:



              I just checked it on Ubuntu 23.04 and it's still exploitable.

              As for submitting patches, have you ever tried to do that? Many times they get rejected, if you look at a number of projects they have rules as to how the code must be structured or else they consider it "disrespectful" and reject it, it's a major pain in the ass.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by sophisticles View Post
                We have seen how well this works, it took more than 10 years to fix a memory leak in Gnome that the developers claimed did not exist and/or could not replicate. despite the fact that every user of Gnome ran into it eventually.
                It's not instructive to focus on individual cases. This is a story of aggregates.

                Originally posted by sophisticles View Post
                ‚Äčthe fork bomb that exists to this day, can be exploited on any Linux based OS in it's default configuration and can bring down a system in minutes:



                I just checked it on Ubuntu 23.04 and it's still exploitable.
                The fork bomb exists on every OS that can fork, including numerous closed-source ones. The only thing stopping it are limits that Linux has, as well as other operating systems.

                Originally posted by sophisticles View Post
                ‚ÄčAs for submitting patches, have you ever tried to do that?
                Not to the kernel, but yes I've submitted patches and gotten them accepted. No, they don't accept just any garbage, or else you might have a point about open source being worse.

                Comment

                Working...
                X