Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes: > On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 11:39:42PM +0100, Marius Bakke wrote: >> Kei Kebreau <k...@openmailbox.org> writes: >> >> > Reviewers, how does this patch look to you? >> >> AFAIU from CVE-2017-0358, ntfs-3g is only vulnerable when installed >> setuid root, which is not the case on guix. >> >> FWIW Debian do not carry this patch, but have fixed the CVE according to >> the changelog. So I doubt this patch is necessary. > > There have been a couple security-related bugs publicized recently that > are only dangerous when the software is installed setuid root. > > Although we don't do that by default, system administrators can do it on > GuixSD. I also think that Guix is valuable as a distribution mechanism > of free source code, and we should fix bugs for that use case. > > So, I was thinking that we should fix these bugs unless they require > grafting, and then we should fix them in core-updates. > > WDYT?
That does make a lot of sense. Reading up on execl(3), it looks like this patch does the right thing and can't hurt even when not setuid. Mind=changed! :P
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
