3 ms·
Wow, that looks like a security nightmare.
by piyush_soni 8y ago
Wow, that looks like a security nightmare.
- yjftsjthsd-h 8y agoMeh? It only works on your own programs.
- jannes 8y agoWhat do you mean? There are many examples of people using LD_PRELOAD to patch the behaviour of other's binaries.
- hawski 8y agoMalicious program without LD_PRELOAD can still copy the binary to other folder and sufficiently change the menu to point to the copy. Then modify the copy by binary patching to do whatever. Or run it via modified qemu to do whatever. The main problem is the lack of a proper sandbox and that all programs in user session generally have the same permissions.
- yjftsjthsd-h 8y agoNo, I mean programs that you are executing as your own user.
- slrz 8y agoSure, but not across a security boundary. Being able to override some library function such that running my text editor does $BADTHING isn't very interesting from a security perspective: if I have the capability to do that, I could also just run a program that does $BADTHING directly. Why bother with additional contortions to involve the text editor?
- bouk 8y agoIt doesn’t work with setuid binaries