On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The first major problem is present in the OpenBSD patch in at [1], > where the failure of falloc() results in a continuation of the loop, > which can update the value of the error variable, resulting in either > fd 0 or fd 1 not being correctly reopened to /dev/null while a > successful falloc() for fd 2 sets error to a suitable value.
Old news, Mr Spender(?), see http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/10147/1998-07-25/1998-07-31/2 or http://seclists.org/lists/bugtraq/1998/Jul/0376.html > Hmm. In theory, yes. But OpenBSD implementation seems to have a > potential small hole. It should abort when it cannot fix everything > but it does not. PERHAPS, a temporary resource starvation could break > it. This was sent that to Bugtraq (and cc'ed to Theo de Raadt) in 1998. --Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak [ Boycott Microsoft--http://www.vcnet.com/bms ] "Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation." _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
