On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:05:29 +0000
"Carlos R. Mafra" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ok, thanks a lot for clarifying it. Having this symmetry on how to include
> the generated menu makes sense for me.
> 
> But how safe is this if one tries to abuse it? Say generate a huge file
> to get a buffer overflow etc. I'm also worried about generating a "menu"
> with 'rm -rf $HOME' or something like that.
> 
> I usually don't think about ways to destroy things, but since WMRootMenu
> is easy to edit someone might be inspired to attack wmaker users this
> way.
 
Well sure, someone could do this (the program would run in user
context). But if you take a look at the current code, popen is run already, so
the moving/cleaning of the code does not really change the attack vector. The
output from popen is written to a growing buffer so in theory you cloud cause a
oom on it. I am open to fixing any buffer overflow bugs that are pointed out.
At least valgrind is happy on the loop as it is now.

- Andreas
-- 
BR Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc.     | phone: +49 6897 1721738 | GPG: C58CF1CB
[email protected] | fax:   +49 6897 1722828 | signed/encrypted
http://lowlatency.de           | cell:  +49 170  9665206 | mail preferred

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to