Live data from Hacker News

XZ backdoor: "It's RCE, not auth bypass, and gated/unreplayable."

bsky.app

861–862 of 862 posts

Re: XZ backdoor: "It's RCE, not auth bypass, and gated/unreplayable."

#861

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true, it would be much harder to hook into openssl functions if the final executable was static [1], the only way is that if the openssl function this attack targeted, actually called a function from libxz. [1] https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/GNU_IFUNC Dynamic loading is relic of the past and cause of many headaches in linux ecosystem, in this case it also just obfuscates the execution path of the code more so…

Looking at IFUNC, there never seems to be a reason to allow function loading from a different library than the one the call is in, right? Maybe a restriction like that could be built in. Or just explicitly enumerate the possible substitutions per site.

IFUNC isn't used directly to patch the functions of another library here, it's just the entry point for the exploit code. IFUNC is used as opposed to other ways to execute code on library load because it runs very early (before linking tables are remapped read-only).

Re: XZ backdoor: "It's RCE, not auth bypass, and gated/unreplayable."

#862
post #89

The questions this backdoor raises: - what other ones exist by this same team or similar teams? - how many such teams are operating? - how many such dependencies are vulnerable to such infiltration attacks? what is our industry’s attack surface for such covert operations? I think making a graph of all major network services (apache httpd, postgres, mysql, nginx, openssh, dropbear ssh, haproxy, varnish, caddy, squid,…

Also: Why did Debian patch a service that runs as root and accepts connections from the internet to load unnecessary libraries?

Also: Why did Debian apply patches to a service that runs as root (when those patches have been rected upstream) for a second time after such behavior has already led to a widely known vulnerability in Debian.
Post reply on HN