At Tue, 19 Oct 2021 02:44:03 -0700, Anders Kaseorg <andersk@mit.edu> wrote in
> On 10/19/21 01:34, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > I tend to agree to this, but seeing ssh ignoring $HOME, I'm not sure
> > it's safe that we follow the variable at least when accessing
> > confidentiality(?) files. Since I don't understand the exact
> > reasoning for the ssh's behavior so it's just my humbole opinion.
>
> According to https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3048#c1, it
> used to be supported to install the ssh binary as setuid. A
> setuid/setgid binary needs to treat all environment variables with
> suspicion: if it can be convinced to write a file to $HOME with root
> privileges, then a user who modifies $HOME before invoking the binary
> could cause it to write to a file that the user normally couldn’t.
>
> There’s no such concern for a binary that isn’t setuid/setgid. Anyone
> with the ability to modify $HOME can be assumed to already have full
> control of the user account.
Thansk for the link. Still I'm not sure it's the fact but it sounds
reasonable enough. If that's the case, I vote +1 for psql or other
commands honoring $HOME.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center