31–40 of 100 posts
> This change now means that in the future if an attacker were to exploit some previously unknown vulnerability in a given system service that is running as a separate user, they would then not be able to access the data of any other user (both human or system service) on the system. If the attacker can already access arbitrary files on your box, I don't think simple unix permissions will save you
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So let's just set everything to 777? /s
All I am saying is that security is like onion layers, and unix permissions are the last layer probably. If the attacker penetrated through all the other layers, chances are that unix permissions will not save you.
chmod'ing the homedir would've prevented that. Unix happens to be pretty good about directory permissions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does that opt you in or out?
Don’t know, don’t care. The extension is called “I don’t care about cookies” not “automatic opt in/out” :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All I am saying is that security is like onion layers, and unix permissions are the last layer probably. If the attacker penetrated through all the other layers, chances are that unix permissions will not save you.
Former pentester here. It was often the case that we were able to penetrate a box as a low-level user account, and the way we escalated was to search ~/.bash_history of an admin account. chmod'ing the homedir would've prevented that. Unix happens to be pretty good about directory permissions.
Makes sense to me, but I'd be much more excited to go back to not having the snap directory shoved in my face.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Former pentester here. It was often the case that we were able to penetrate a box as a low-level user account, and the way we escalated was to search ~/.bash_history of an admin account. chmod'ing the homedir would've prevented that. Unix happens to be pretty good about directory permissions.
The .bash_history file is mode 0600, regardless of directory permissions. Was this not always the case?
Welp. Yes, I misremembered that specific example.
Still, you’d be amazed how often people leave json credentials in their homedir that can be used to pivot to e.g. S3.
This is just changing the default permissions on a home directory -not a more complicated encrypted/systemd setup I thought it would be.
I totally thought they were turning on homed with encryption by default, and was _super_ excited. I've been toying with doing that myself and having someone go first would be great.
So, finally I learned just not to use file-based encryption, except for minor stuff like dropbox directory.
I remember a while ago, Ubuntu used encryptfs for home directories, but it was removed. Weird, because I thought it was a great idea
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The .bash_history file is mode 0600, regardless of directory permissions. Was this not always the case?
Heh. Looks like I’ve been out of the game longer than I thought. It’s suddenly been 6 years. Welp. Yes, I misremembered that specific example. Still, you’d be amazed how often people leave json credentials in their homedir that can be used to pivot to e.g. S3.
Another reason I don’t sudo and instead ssh