I'm a little surprised this got a CVE number to be honest; allowing
users to edit files via some privileged mechanism when they may control
some portion of the filesystem under consideration is always going to be
dangerous.

sudo cannot actually prevent this -- for example, the patch for this
issue http://www.sudo.ws/repos/sudo/rev/9636fd256325 (look for the
sudo_edit.c hunk) just uses O_NOFOLLOW to try to mitigate this issue:

+#ifdef O_NOFOLLOW
+static int
+sudo_edit_open(const char *path, int oflags, mode_t mode, int sflags)
+{
+    if (!ISSET(sflags, CD_SUDOEDIT_FOLLOW))
+       oflags |= O_NOFOLLOW;
+    return open(path, oflags, mode);
+}
+#else

But O_NOFOLLOW only functions on the final component of a pathname, so
you can still edit e.g. /etc/shadow if you create a symlink "ln -s /etc
etc".

I'm pretty sure the sudo patch is more or less worthless; here's a far
simpler program to test with:


| #include <sys/types.h>
| #include <sys/stat.h>
| #include <fcntl.h>
| #include <stdio.h>
| 
| int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
|       int fd;
|       int err = 0;
|       int i;
| 
|       for (i=0; i<argc; i++) {
|               fd = open(argv[i], O_RDONLY | O_NOFOLLOW);
|               if (fd < 0) {
|                       fprintf(stderr, "open %s failed: %m\n", argv[i]);
|                       err++;
|               } else {
|                       close(fd);
|               }
|       }
| 
|       return err;
| }

(Sorry for the pipes, launchpad collapsed all the spacing, making it
illegible.)

$ make o_nofollow
cc     o_nofollow.c   -o o_nofollow
$ mkdir tests
$ cd tests
$ ln -s /etc etc
$ ln -s /etc/passwd passwd
$ ln -s /etc/shadow shadow
$ ../o_nofollow /etc/passwd /etc/shadow ./etc/passwd ./etc/shadow ./passwd 
./shadow
open /etc/shadow failed: Permission denied
open ./etc/shadow failed: Permission denied
open ./passwd failed: Too many levels of symbolic links
open ./shadow failed: Too many levels of symbolic links
$ 

Note that opening ./etc/passwd succeeded here because ./etc is a symlink
to /etc and O_NOFOLLOW does not prevent this.

The #else portion of the code may be fine, I haven't studied it
extensively, so there may be some way to salvage the patch. But I
suspect it's never going to be perfect.

Thanks

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1512781

Title:
  CVE-2015-5602 - Unauthorized Privilege Escalation

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sudo/+bug/1512781/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to