mailing list archives
Re: [Full-disclosure] Apache suEXEC privilege elevation / information disclosure
From: Reindl Harald <h.reindl () thelounge net>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2013 17:39:13 +0200
Am 11.08.2013 14:50, schrieb Ansgar Wiechers:
On 2013-08-11 Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 10.08.2013 16:52, schrieb Tobias Kreidl:
It is for this specific reason that utilities like suPHP can be used
as a powerful tool to at least keep the account user from shooting
anyone but him/herself in the foot because of any configuration or
broken security issues. Allowing suexec to anyone but a seasoned,
responsible admin is IMO a recipe for disaster.
and what makes you believe that a developer can not be a "seasoned,
Most developers I have met would focus on getting new features to work
rather than secure/reliable operation of the deployed software
maybe you met the wrong ones............
on the other hand most admins i met did not use "disallow_functions"
a responsilble developer which is at the same time admin has the
knowledge not using dangerous functions and disables them
one config line and the whole topic would be obsolete by not
allowing symlinks from web-applications
disable_functions = "popen, pclose, exec, passthru, shell_exec, system, proc_open, proc_close, proc_nice,
proc_terminate, proc_get_status, pcntl_exec, apache_child_terminate, posix_kill, posix_mkfifo, posix_setpgid,
posix_setsid, posix_setuid, mail, symlink, link, dl, get_current_user, getmypid, getmyuid, getrusage, pfsockopen,
socket_accept, socket_bind, openlog, syslog"
bullshit, many of the "seasoned, responsible admins" which are only
admins are unable to really understand the implications of whatever
config they rollout
Apparently you still haven't learned your lesson from being banned from
the postfix-users mailing list
oh i forgot, in the enlish speaking world in have to write
"clould i ask you please could consider to think about...."
Description: OpenPGP digital signature