sudo 1.6.9p20 patch in OPENBSD_4_3 and OPENBSD_4_4

[Brian A. Seklecki]

All:

Do we want to slip this into presently supported branches containing
1.6.9p17?  It's a quick patch:

http://www.sudo.ws/cgi-bin/cvsweb/sudo/parse.c.diff?r1=1.160.2.21r2=1.160.2.22only_with_tag=SUDO_1_6_9

I tested it on -rOPENBSD_4_3.  Just be sure to nuke the version string.


$ more sudo_p20.patch 
===
RCS file: /home/anoncvs/cvs/sudo/parse.c,v
retrieving revision 1.160.2.21
retrieving revision 1.160.2.22
diff -u -p -r1.160.2.21 -r1.160.2.22
--- sudo/parse.c2008/11/02 14:35:53 1.160.2.21
+++ sudo/parse.c2009/01/28 00:50:01 1.160.2.22
@@ -651,9 +651,11 @@ usergr_matches(group, user, pw)
 /*
  * If the user has a supplementary group vector, check it first.
  */
-for (i = 0; i  user_ngroups; i++) {
-   if (grp-gr_gid == user_groups[i])
-   return(TRUE);
+if (strcmp(user, user_name) == 0) {
+   for (i = 0; i  user_ngroups; i++) {
+   if (grp-gr_gid == user_groups[i])
+   return(TRUE);
+   }
 }
 if (grp-gr_mem != NULL) {
for (cur = grp-gr_mem; *cur; cur++) {


sekle...@seawing:/usr/src/usr.bin$ sudo patch -p0  sudo_p20.patch 
Hmm...  Looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--
|===
|RCS file: /home/anoncvs/cvs/sudo/parse.c,v
|retrieving revision 1.160.2.21
|retrieving revision 1.160.2.22
|diff -u -p -r1.160.2.21 -r1.160.2.22
|--- sudo/parse.c   2008/11/02 14:35:53 1.160.2.21
|+++ sudo/parse.c   2009/01/28 00:50:01 1.160.2.22
--
Patching file sudo/parse.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 succeeded at 606 (offset -45 lines).
done

Re: sudo 1.6.9p20 patch in OPENBSD_4_3 and OPENBSD_4_4

[Todd C. Miller]

In message 1234278635.17569.9.ca...@soundwave.ws.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefus
ion.com
so spake Brian A. Seklecki (lavalamp):

 Do we want to slip this into presently supported branches containing
 1.6.9p17?  It's a quick patch:
 
 http://www.sudo.ws/cgi-bin/cvsweb/sudo/parse.c.diff?r1=1.160.2.21r2=1.160.2.
 22only_with_tag=SUDO_1_6_9
 
 I tested it on -rOPENBSD_4_3.  Just be sure to nuke the version string.

I think this is worth doing, though the bug won't affect most
people's configuration.  -current is unaffected as it contains
sudo 1.7.0.

 - todd