You are perfectly correct, it was ed, not vi and sudoedit could be the
solution, thanks.
I will try to search the internet how to do the LD_PRELOAD trick with ed.
Thanks :)
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:09 AM, Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 9:43 PM, someone
> wrote:
> > "Yeah, th
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 9:43 PM, someone wrote:
> "Yeah, that LD_PRELOAD trick NOEXEC uses doesn't work so well with
> static executables."
>
> Thank you, so there is a way tricking noexec with vi to get a root shell.
No, that's not what naddy demonstrated. He showed that NOEXEC didn't
work with
> "Yeah, that LD_PRELOAD trick NOEXEC uses doesn't work so well with
> static executables."
>
> Thank you, so there is a way tricking noexec with vi to get a root shell.
> But how exactly? Why isn't it fixed? :O
Oh something is broken?
Please show your work.
"Yeah, that LD_PRELOAD trick NOEXEC uses doesn't work so well with
static executables."
Thank you, so there is a way tricking noexec with vi to get a root shell.
But how exactly? Why isn't it fixed? :O
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 9:49 PM, Christian Weisgerber
wrote:
> On 2015-04-27, "whynot sudo"
syphax azmole wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I have a small "C" program using standard POSIX timer_create(2),
> timer_delete(2) and SIGEV_SIGNAL.
> It seems that OpenBSD doesn't have such API. (and doesn't have librt).
> I'm curious: why are they not implemented ? For security reason ? they are
> not ea
Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> A year ago, tedu@ published reop, which "does everything you’d
> expect a PGP program to do".
> http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/reop
>
> There's GitHub site that's still active and there is ports/security/reop,
> maintained by jturner@, but generally it has been a
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015, at 10:52 PM, Adam Wolk wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015, at 10:43 PM, Adam Wolk wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015, at 10:22 PM, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> > > On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 20:06:59 +0200, Adam Wolk wrote:
> > >
> > > > Apr 27 19:54:55 tintagel spamd[27724]: can't delete 66.111
Hello list,
I tried OpenBSD on my laptop, a macbook pro late 2013, and I have
freeze while installing it.
With OpenBSD 5.6, it hangs 5 minutes when printing "scsibusx at
softraidx: 256 targets", and then continue until prompting command
from user. (with I for installation, U for upgrade, etc...).
Hello list,
I have a small "C" program using standard POSIX timer_create(2),
timer_delete(2) and SIGEV_SIGNAL.
It seems that OpenBSD doesn't have such API. (and doesn't have librt).
I'm curious: why are they not implemented ? For security reason ? they are
not easy to implement ? Maybe they are us
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015, at 10:43 PM, Adam Wolk wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015, at 10:22 PM, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 20:06:59 +0200, Adam Wolk wrote:
> >
> > > Apr 27 19:54:55 tintagel spamd[27724]: can't delete 66.111.4.25
> > > out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
> > > from spamd d
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015, at 10:22 PM, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 20:06:59 +0200, Adam Wolk wrote:
>
> > Apr 27 19:54:55 tintagel spamd[27724]: can't delete 66.111.4.25
> > out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
> > from spamd db (Error 22)
> >
> > Does anyone know how serious that error is
On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 20:06:59 +0200, Adam Wolk wrote:
> Apr 27 19:54:55 tintagel spamd[27724]: can't delete 66.111.4.25
> out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
> from spamd db (Error 22)
>
> Does anyone know how serious that error is (should I be worried) and
> what might have caused it?
Error 22 is EIN
On 27-4-2015 21:46, Ville Valkonen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Apr 27, 2015 9:56 PM, "Ton Muller" wrote:
>>
>> Ok.
>> perhaps a bit cryptic.
>> but this is the situation, the package portal is huge, ok, no problem
>> with it.
>> but finding a sertain package is a pain.
>> i can recall from the time i was
On 2015-04-27, "whynot sudo" wrote:
> Cmnd_Alias FOO = /bin/ed, /usr/bin/ed, /usr/bin/vi
> foouser LOCALHOST = NOPASSWD: NOEXEC: FOO
>
> Can the "foouser" escape to root prompt?
Let's try!
$ sudo ed
!sh
# id
uid=0(root) gid=0(wheel) groups=0(wheel), 2(kmem), 3(sys), 4(tty),
5(operator), 20(sta
Hi,
On Apr 27, 2015 9:56 PM, "Ton Muller" wrote:
>
> Ok.
> perhaps a bit cryptic.
> but this is the situation, the package portal is huge, ok, no problem
> with it.
> but finding a sertain package is a pain.
> i can recall from the time i was running 4.6, i when to below link
> http://www.openbsd
On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 20:56:00 +0200
Ton Muller wrote:
> Ok.
> perhaps a bit cryptic.
> but this is the situation, the package portal is huge, ok, no problem
> with it.
> but finding a sertain package is a pain.
> i can recall from the time i was running 4.6, i when to below link
> http://www.openb
Ok.
perhaps a bit cryptic.
but this is the situation, the package portal is huge, ok, no problem
with it.
but finding a sertain package is a pain.
i can recall from the time i was running 4.6, i when to below link
http://www.openbsd.org/4.6_packages/i386.html
a nice web portal opened with a discri
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Richo Healey wrote:
> On 28/04/15 05:28 +1200, Carlin Bingham wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 28 Apr 2015, at 04:46 AM, whynot sudo wrote:
>>
>>> Hello list,
>>>
>>> We know it's safer* to use sudoedit, but what bad things can happen if we
>>> have the following in sudoers?
>
On 28/04/15 05:28 +1200, Carlin Bingham wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015, at 04:46 AM, whynot sudo wrote:
Hello list,
We know it's safer* to use sudoedit, but what bad things can happen if we
have the following in sudoers?
Cmnd_Alias FOO = /bin/ed, /usr/bin/ed, /usr/bin/vi
foouser LOCALHOST = NOPASS
"Lists
A list allows the specification of multiple similar criteria within a
rule.
For example, multiple protocols, port numbers, addresses, etc. So,
instead of
writing one filter rule for each IP address that needs to be blocked,
one rule
can be written by specifying the IP addresses in a lis
Hi all,
I spent part of the weekend setting up a private OpenSMTPD server using
spamd.
Everything seems to be working great but I'm now starting to see some
weird behaviour.
The server is running an amd64 snapshot from Apr 25 using a default
spamd configuration.
Does anyone know how serious that
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015, at 04:46 AM, whynot sudo wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> We know it's safer* to use sudoedit, but what bad things can happen if we
> have the following in sudoers?
>
> Cmnd_Alias FOO = /bin/ed, /usr/bin/ed, /usr/bin/vi
> foouser LOCALHOST = NOPASSWD: NOEXEC: FOO
>
> Can the "foous
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 05:34:43PM +0200, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> A year ago, tedu@ published reop, which "does everything you???d
> expect a PGP program to do".
> http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/reop
>
> There's GitHub site that's still active and there is ports/security/reop,
> maintai
"In the bad thing category, you could break your sudo config."
What do you mean by that?
Original Message
From: ludovic coues
To: whynot sudo
Subject: Re: What bad things could happen if we don't use sudoedit?
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 18:52:56 +0200
> 2015-04-27 18:46 GMT+02
Hello list,
We know it's safer* to use sudoedit, but what bad things can happen if we have
the following in sudoers?
Cmnd_Alias FOO = /bin/ed, /usr/bin/ed, /usr/bin/vi
foouser LOCALHOST = NOPASSWD: NOEXEC: FOO
Can the "foouser" escape to root prompt? - of course besides that he could now
edit
A year ago, tedu@ published reop, which "does everything you’d
expect a PGP program to do".
http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/reop
There's GitHub site that's still active and there is ports/security/reop,
maintained by jturner@, but generally it has been awfully silent.
If anybody uses reop, th
http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/macros.html
"Lists
A list allows the specification of multiple similar criteria within a rule.
For example, multiple protocols, port numbers, addresses, etc. So, instead of
writing one filter rule for each IP address that needs to be blocked, one rule
can be written
Theo de Raadt (2015-04-26 16:53 +0200):
> > Eivind Eide (2015-04-26 13:02 +0200):
> > > I've been trying to update this -current machine with the bsd.rd from the
> > > last 4 snapshots,
> > > the last being from "Sun Apr 26 02:22:08 MDT 2015".
> > > However this kernel immediately after reporting h
> > Careful with your allegations, ok?
>
> I apologize. I wonder if RANDOM can refer to srand_deterministic.
I don't see any reason. It is documenting the standards-required
behaviour, and it follows it as far as I can see.
Hi,
I'm getting a strange output from pfctl that I cannot explain, perhaps
someone lurking the list have the answer?
When using interface groupnames in my pf.conf, I see the same rule 4
times when doing a pfctl -s rules.
The interface group i'm using, have a vlan and carp member.
Ex.
pass
> Careful with your allegations, ok?
I apologize. I wonder if RANDOM can refer to srand_deterministic.
31 matches
Mail list logo
