5 ms·

Since the post is relatively non-technical, I'd like to underscore that there are substantial concerns with the original and the followup patch, because with or

by f- 12y ago

Since the post is relatively non-technical, I'd like to underscore that there are substantial concerns with the original and the followup patch, because with or without it, the underlying bash code parser is still exposed to the Internet. Nobody has posted an RCE vector that would be universally bad for the patched version, but several people have already identified "hmm, that's unexpected" types of global side effects when attacker-controlled strings are parsed as functions by bash. More is likely to come. As of today, based on our conversations on oss-security, there is a third, unofficial patch that takes a much saner approach of isolating exported functions in a distinct namespace: http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/09/25/13 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/09/25/13 Especially in high-value or high-risk scenarios, you may want to give it a try. And if you're interested in the reasons why the original patch is problematic, check out: http://lcamtuf.blogspot.com/2014/09/quick-notes-about-bash-bug-its-impact.html http://lcamtuf.blogspot.com/2014/09/quick-notes-about-bash-b...

jtheory 12y ago
The idea of using bash to do anything with input coming from the internet is asking for trouble, really... It's just a flaw with how CGI works generally, and how PHP etc. encourage you to build webapps. It's the same principle as SQL-injection attacks (and the flaw is there for the same reason! It's the obvious quick solution to just query mysql with "select * from users where username = " . PARAMS['username'].... But this is far more dangerous -- injecting malicious SQL can reveal data, or break things. Injecting malicious bash commands can reconfigure your server to do whatever they like.
- nitrogen 12y ago
  The dangerous thing is that lots of things that look like a library call to the unwary developer actually call out to other processes (visible if you run strace). This vulnerability will not be limited to web servers, either, and there will likely be systems that escape or unescape parameters in ways that evade app firewall rules.
- nostrademons 12y ago
  I've worked with sysadmins that insisted that CGI be disabled for exactly this reason. If we wanted a dynamic website we needed to use mod_perl or mod_php (it was back in the early 2000s, Rails/Django/nginx hadn't yet been invented). It wasn't a perfect solution - both of them still had plenty of security vulnerabilities - but it cut down the attack surface significantly. Now I understand what all the security people who said "never use system(). Never, ever" meant.

by f- 12y ago

jtheory 12y ago

The idea of using bash to do anything with input coming from the internet is asking for trouble, really... It's just a flaw with how CGI works generally, and how PHP etc. encourage you to build webapps. It's the same principle as SQL-injection attacks (and the flaw is there for the same reason! It's the obvious quick solution to just query mysql with "select * from users where username = " . PARAMS['username'].... But this is far more dangerous -- injecting malicious SQL can reveal data, or break things. Injecting malicious bash commands can reconfigure your server to do whatever they like.

nitrogen 12y ago
The dangerous thing is that lots of things that look like a library call to the unwary developer actually call out to other processes (visible if you run strace). This vulnerability will not be limited to web servers, either, and there will likely be systems that escape or unescape parameters in ways that evade app firewall rules.
nostrademons 12y ago
I've worked with sysadmins that insisted that CGI be disabled for exactly this reason. If we wanted a dynamic website we needed to use mod_perl or mod_php (it was back in the early 2000s, Rails/Django/nginx hadn't yet been invented). It wasn't a perfect solution - both of them still had plenty of security vulnerabilities - but it cut down the attack surface significantly. Now I understand what all the security people who said "never use system(). Never, ever" meant.