Systemd v228 local root exploit

#1

Post by papey » Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 9:28 AM UTC

Systemd v228 local root exploit
openwall.com

Re: Systemd v228 local root exploit

#2

Post by kogepathic » Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 9:55 AM UTC

> "new services as a service"

Accurately describes systemd's development over the past few years.

Re: Systemd v228 local root exploit

#3

Post by digi_owl » Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 10:06 AM UTC

Surprise surprise...

Re: Systemd v228 local root exploit

#4

Post by implr » Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 10:13 AM UTC

>We would like to see that systemd upstream retrieves CVE's themself for their own bugs, even if its believed that its just a local DoS.

So not only they didn't notice this was exploitable, they also seem to think that a local DoS is not enough for a CVE or a public report. Excellent.

Re: Systemd v228 local root exploit

#5

Post by etatoby » Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 10:13 AM UTC

Who would have thought.

Re: Systemd v228 local root exploit

#6

Post by oblio » Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 10:16 AM UTC

digi_owl wrote: post #3

Surprise surprise...

(Future readers can safely ignore the rest of the comment, I was struck by the "did not read the article" disease)

Surprised that software has security flaws? Especially software written in "let-me-use-that-chainsaw-to-trim-the-bushes" C? :)

I know that there will be security flaws in any language, but if there ever was software today that deserved a safer programming language, the init system was it. Or the web browser.

Re: Systemd v228 local root exploit

#7

Post by bergers89 » Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 10:16 AM UTC

yeah, awesome, i enjoy this systemD shit show. Linux is so doomed.

Re: Systemd v228 local root exploit

#8

Post by lclarkmichalek » Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 10:17 AM UTC

oblio wrote: post #6

digi_owl wrote: post #3

Surprise surprise...

(Future readers can safely ignore the rest of the comment, I was struck by the "did not read the article" disease) Surprised that software has security flaws? Especially software written in "let-me-use-that-chainsaw-to-trim-the-bushes" C? :) I know that there will be security flaws in any language, but if there ever was software today that deserved a safer programming language, the init system was it. Or the web brow…

Yeah this issue really has nothing to do with C

Re: Systemd v228 local root exploit

#9

Post by mfukar » Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 10:19 AM UTC

lclarkmichalek wrote: post #8

oblio wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Future readers can safely ignore the rest of the comment, I was struck by the "did not read the article" disease) Surprised that software has security flaws? Especially software written in "let-me-use-that-chainsaw-to-trim-the-bushes" C? :) I know that there will be security flaws in any language, but if there ever was software today that deserved a safer programming language, the init system was it. Or the web brow…

Yeah this issue really has nothing to do with C

It's not the logic of hammering my own fingers that is flawed, it is my choice of a hammer!

Re: Systemd v228 local root exploit

#10

Post by galapago » Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 10:20 AM UTC

implr wrote: post #4

>We would like to see that systemd upstream retrieves CVE's themself for their own bugs, even if its believed that its just a local DoS. So not only they didn't notice this was exploitable, they also seem to think that a local DoS is not enough for a CVE or a public report. Excellent.

> they also seem to think that a local DoS is not enough for a CVE

Some vendors do not consider local DoS as security issues. I tried to discuss these kind of issues in oss-security but even MITRE refused to assign a CVE.