Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:20:15 -0700 (PDT)
From:      dima@rdy.com (Dima Ruban)
To:        Christopher Masto <chris@netmonger.net>
Cc:        "Chris D. Faulhaber" <jedgar@fxp.org>, Warner Losh <imp@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin/perl Makefile
Message-ID:  <200008112020.NAA18859@sivka.rdy.com>
In-Reply-To: <20000811144136.A12290@netmonger.net> "from Christopher Masto at Aug 11, 2000 02:41:48 pm"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Christopher Masto writes:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2000 at 02:29:37PM -0400, Chris D. Faulhaber wrote:
> > > >   Don't build suidperl by default.  Make users specifically enable its
> > > >   building.
> > > 
> > > Umm.. isn't that a bit of a radical change?  Any reason for it?
> > 
> > Any reason against it?  Given the security hole found under Linux and
> > potential problems of Yet Another Suid Binary, it seems a good
> > idea.  Also, see the recent discussions on FreeBSD-security.
> 
> The reason against it is that it's a standard part of Perl, and a very
> useful one.  Without it, those who install from binary, or don't know
> to set this option, will not be able to run setuid Perl programs.
> Since Perl has some features specifically designed to aid in writing
> secure setuid programs, removing suidperl could actually cause a
> revenge effect and end up resulting in _more_ security holes.

How do you see that resulting in _more_ security holes?
If /usr/bin/suidperl doesn't exist and some program referes to it, it will
give you "command not found" (or similar) message.

> This was a strange interaction bug in a program which is very well
> inspected, has a good security reputation, was fixed very quickly, and

As Warner pointed out, this was a second problem with suidperl for the last
3 (or maybe 2) years. Generally it's more than enough to seriousely think
about nuking it from the default installation.

> didn't even apply to FreeBSD.  It seems a big of an overreaction to
> disable suidperl because of it.

I don't think we overreacted.

> As Warner said on freebsd-security, if you're paranoid, you can just
> delete suidperl yourself.
> 
> If this change is not backed out, I think it is important to at least

I do not believe it will be backed out.

> come up with an easy way to get suidperl without building from source.
> We should not force this limitation on casual users.
> -- 
> Christopher Masto         Senior Network Monkey      NetMonger Communications
> chris@netmonger.net        info@netmonger.net        http://www.netmonger.net
> 
> Free yourself, free your machine, free the daemon -- http://www.freebsd.org/
> 

-- dima


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200008112020.NAA18859>