With physical access, one has been able to create admin accounts for as long as I can remember. - Start up the Mac whilst holding down ⌘-S. This boots the Mac into Single-User Mode and provides a method of interacting with OS X via the command-line, with full root privileges. - Then check the filesystem to ensure there are no problems: "/sbin/fsck -fy" - Then mount the filesystem for it to be accessible: "/sbin/mount…
Isn't the idea though that with physical access, the game is already over anyway? If an intruder has physical access to your machine they will eventually be able to get to anything they want. If someone really wants to protect their data, they have to count physical access as a possibility and rely on encryption and/or remote wiping - the operating system login isn't going to do much anyway.
Hidden backdoor API to root privileges in Apple OS X
21–30 of 367 posts
Re: Hidden backdoor API to root privileges in Apple OS X
#22> Apple indicated that this issue required a substantial amount of changes on their side, and that they will not back port the fix to 10.9.x and older. What ? So all OS X boxes are simply broken, privileges-wise, if they're not on 10.10?
Re: Hidden backdoor API to root privileges in Apple OS X
#23With physical access, one has been able to create admin accounts for as long as I can remember. - Start up the Mac whilst holding down ⌘-S. This boots the Mac into Single-User Mode and provides a method of interacting with OS X via the command-line, with full root privileges. - Then check the filesystem to ensure there are no problems: "/sbin/fsck -fy" - Then mount the filesystem for it to be accessible: "/sbin/mount…
But yes, this is not possible with a firmware password or with disk encryption (FileVault) enabled.
Re: Hidden backdoor API to root privileges in Apple OS X
#24> Apple indicated that this issue required a substantial amount of changes on their side, and that they will not back port the fix to 10.9.x and older. What ? So all OS X boxes are simply broken, privileges-wise, if they're not on 10.10?
Re: Hidden backdoor API to root privileges in Apple OS X
#25With physical access, one has been able to create admin accounts for as long as I can remember. - Start up the Mac whilst holding down ⌘-S. This boots the Mac into Single-User Mode and provides a method of interacting with OS X via the command-line, with full root privileges. - Then check the filesystem to ensure there are no problems: "/sbin/fsck -fy" - Then mount the filesystem for it to be accessible: "/sbin/mount…
Not possible if full disk encryption is enabled. And that is a default since a year or so.
Think hardware keyloggers, fake MBRs, &c.
OP's trick won't work, but that's an "implementation detail;" there are plenty others that will.
EDIT: to clarify; that's not what you said, it's just a common enough misconception that it's worth being explicit about, here.
Re: Hidden backdoor API to root privileges in Apple OS X
#26With physical access, one has been able to create admin accounts for as long as I can remember. - Start up the Mac whilst holding down ⌘-S. This boots the Mac into Single-User Mode and provides a method of interacting with OS X via the command-line, with full root privileges. - Then check the filesystem to ensure there are no problems: "/sbin/fsck -fy" - Then mount the filesystem for it to be accessible: "/sbin/mount…
Re: Hidden backdoor API to root privileges in Apple OS X
#27Re: Hidden backdoor API to root privileges in Apple OS X
#28> Apple indicated that this issue required a substantial amount of changes on their side, and that they will not back port the fix to 10.9.x and older. What ? So all OS X boxes are simply broken, privileges-wise, if they're not on 10.10?
What better way to encourage people to upgrade.
Re: Hidden backdoor API to root privileges in Apple OS X
#29>Philip tried patching that function (replacing sete with setne), with success:
How do you patch the binary without root or the admin user password anyway?
Re: Hidden backdoor API to root privileges in Apple OS X
#30> Apple indicated that this issue required a substantial amount of changes on their side, and that they will not back port the fix to 10.9.x and older. What ? So all OS X boxes are simply broken, privileges-wise, if they're not on 10.10?
What better way to encourage people to upgrade.
The majority of their user base doesn't know and wouldn't care about this type of thing even if they did.