4 ms·
sudo offers updated binaries for OS X 10.5 and up so you don't have to wait for Apple: http://www.sudo.ws/sudo/download.html#binary http://www.sudo.ws/sudo/down
by npongratz 13y ago
sudo offers updated binaries for OS X 10.5 and up so you don't have to wait for Apple: http://www.sudo.ws/sudo/download.html#binary http://www.sudo.ws/sudo/download.html#binary
If you don't trust the binaries, I found it easy to update the vulnerable sudo v1.7.0 on my OS X 10.6 machine by building from source and overwriting the one supplied by Apple:
0) Backup /usr/bin/sudo (temporarily; you'll want to delete the old sudo after verifying the new one works), and backup /etc/sudoers just to be safe
1) Download the source for sudo v1.7.10p7 linked on sudo's homepage: http://www.sudo.ws http://www.sudo.ws
2) Untar, ungzip, go to resulting source directory
3) Run configure, telling it to overwrite the vulnerable sudo
configure --prefix=/usr/bin
4) Compile
make
5) Install
sudo make install
6) Delete the old sudo you backed up in (0)
See also the sudo installation notes here: http://www.sudo.ws/sudo/install.html http://www.sudo.ws/sudo/install.html
- bits 13y agoIf you use `configure --prefix=/usr/bin`, you'll end up with sudo installed in /usr/bin/bin/sudo. Instead, try ./configure --prefix=/usr to use the /usr hierarchy (/usr/bin, /usr/sbin, /usr/share, etc...) instead of the /usr/local hierarchy. Also, if you're able to run an executable in the current directory without specifying its location, as in configure instead of ./configure, then you have . (pwd) in your $PATH, which isn't recommended because a malicious executable might be in the directory you're in, and it might be named something like ls. Just listing the directory could have you owned.
- npongratz 13y agoYou're absolutely right on all counts. You caught me writing that sloppily from memory. Thank you for the corrections!