3 ms·

Or simply append `alias sudo="sudo evil.sh; sudo"` to .bash_profile. Although, OS X is a bit like Windows. A bad program running in userspace can essentially r

by vortico 11y ago

Or simply append `alias sudo="sudo evil.sh; sudo"` to .bash_profile. Although, OS X is a bit like Windows. A bad program running in userspace can essentially ruin your system as much as a program running as root. Privilege escalation is not a relatively big deal when you can `shred -u ~/` without root.

coldtea 11y ago
>Although, OS X is a bit like Windows. A bad program running in userspace can essentially ruin your system as much as a program running as root. Erm, OS X has sandboxing. So, no. Except if you use unsigned third party stuff.
- driverdan 11y ago
  Which is pretty much everyone reading HN.
  - coldtea 11y ago
    In which case it's no different to Linux, OpenBSD or whatever. As long as its your account files that matter, and you're running an app un-sandboxed, then it has access to them. Nothing Windows or OS X particular about it. As about "ruining your system", no, without root privileges it cannot, in either OS X or Windows. Of course it can if there's a privilege escalation bug, but there are tons of those for GNU/Gnome/KDE packages too.
- __david__ 11y ago
  I think he only sandboxed apps are the ones from the App Store—Signing is orthogonal to sandboxing. Even signed apps that you get from anywhere other than then App Store aren't sandboxed.
  - comex 11y ago
    You can sandbox non-App Store apps the same way as App Store ones, you're just not forced to. And so developers don't.
WalterGR 11y ago
...like Windows. A bad program running in userspace can essentially ruin your system as much as a program running as root. How so? Are you talking about pre-Vista - i.e. versions of Windows in which the user created during first run was an Administrator, and UAC didn't exist - though you could certainly create non-administrator accounts? Vista came out eight years ago... Or do you mean pre-NT, when there was no separation of any kind? NT came out 22 years ago...
- vortico 11y ago
  I mean that most of the "important stuff" is running in user space. You can shut down the computer, spread viruses, and delete the user's most important files. The only administrator-owned files on a typical Windows installation happen to be the replaceable ones. The ones modifiable by a user are the custom, personal, and sometimes irreplaceable files. This is mostly true on personal Linux machines as well. I'm just expressing my opinion that you don't need root access to pwn someone's machine.

by vortico 11y ago

coldtea 11y ago

>Although, OS X is a bit like Windows. A bad program running in userspace can essentially ruin your system as much as a program running as root. Erm, OS X has sandboxing. So, no. Except if you use unsigned third party stuff.

driverdan 11y ago
Which is pretty much everyone reading HN.
- coldtea 11y ago
  In which case it's no different to Linux, OpenBSD or whatever. As long as its your account files that matter, and you're running an app un-sandboxed, then it has access to them. Nothing Windows or OS X particular about it. As about "ruining your system", no, without root privileges it cannot, in either OS X or Windows. Of course it can if there's a privilege escalation bug, but there are tons of those for GNU/Gnome/KDE packages too.
__david__ 11y ago
I think he only sandboxed apps are the ones from the App Store—Signing is orthogonal to sandboxing. Even signed apps that you get from anywhere other than then App Store aren't sandboxed.
- comex 11y ago
  You can sandbox non-App Store apps the same way as App Store ones, you're just not forced to. And so developers don't.

WalterGR 11y ago

...like Windows. A bad program running in userspace can essentially ruin your system as much as a program running as root. How so? Are you talking about pre-Vista - i.e. versions of Windows in which the user created during first run was an Administrator, and UAC didn't exist - though you could certainly create non-administrator accounts? Vista came out eight years ago... Or do you mean pre-NT, when there was no separation of any kind? NT came out 22 years ago...

vortico 11y ago
I mean that most of the "important stuff" is running in user space. You can shut down the computer, spread viruses, and delete the user's most important files. The only administrator-owned files on a typical Windows installation happen to be the replaceable ones. The ones modifiable by a user are the custom, personal, and sometimes irreplaceable files. This is mostly true on personal Linux machines as well. I'm just expressing my opinion that you don't need root access to pwn someone's machine.