Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067)
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5314846B.3080902@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/03/2014 02:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: >> The only way I can see this being of real use to an attacker is if they >> could use this exploit to create a wormed version of PostgresQL on the >> target build system. Is that possible? > It's theoretically possible, since having broken into the build user's > account they could modify the already-built-but-not-yet-packaged PG > executables. > > Having said that, though, I concur with the feeling that this probably > isn't a useful exploit in practice. On Red Hat's build systems, for > example, different packages are built in different chroots. So even if > a malicious package is being built concurrently, it could not reach the > postmaster's socket. A breakin would only be possible for somebody who > had outside-the-chroots control of the build machine ... in which case > they can hack pretty much any built package pretty much any way they > want, without need for anything as fiddly as this. > > Other vendors might do things differently, but it still seems likely > that there would be easier exploits available to anyone who's managed > to get control on a machine used for package building. > > I'm less worried about vendor build systems and more about roll your own systems like Gentoo, FreeBSD ports, and Homebrew. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: