Bug 517428
| Summary: | move secure_path from compile-time option to sudoers file | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Ademar Reis <areis> |
| Component: | sudo | Assignee: | Daniel Kopeček <dkopecek> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | 12 | CC: | dkopecek, eparis, h1k6zn2m, kzak, matt.castelein, mikel |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened, Triaged |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2010-01-07 13:36:20 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Ademar Reis
2009-08-13 21:05:20 UTC
sudo stopped finding programs in $PATH due to a change in Fedora 10 (bug 80215). This bug report is about fixing that. I am obviously in favor. See discussion on bug #471603 Matthew Miller seems to disagree. MUST WE KEEP HAVING THIS SAME ARGUMENT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN?! Sheesh! If you want to create a default configuration in /etc/sudoers that removes non-standards directories from the search path, so that sudo is maximally secure by default, then great, fine, I think that's a jolly good idea. BUT THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION WHATSOEVER FOR MAKING THAT A COMPILE-TIME OPTION THAT CANNOT BE OVERRIDDEN IN THE CONFIGURATION FILE. As at least one comment in bug 471603 noted, it is not the job of the people building and releasing Fedora RPMs to prevent admins from consciously doing things that reduce the paranoia level, if they understand what they are doing. So put a big honkin' comment above the secure_path setting in /etc/sudoers and warn the admin about what it means to change it, but LET THE ADMIN CHANGE IT IF S/HE KNOWS WHAT S/HE IS DOING, dammit! For heaven's sake, there are COUNTLESS ways I could compromise my system's security with trivial configuration changes. For us to be arguing about this one is mind-bogglingly absurd. It is just unbelievable that we are still arguing about this. something recently cause my rawhide machine to not have any /sbin entries in the PATH when I sudo -s. Is that this bug? Where am I supposed to set a sane default path now? well, this bug was almost certainly the cause, and it sucks to break people like me, but I think it's for the better. My problem is that I had edited my sudoers file so the new one which set the defaults secure_patch was created as a .rpmnew file. When I added it by hand to my sudoers file things seem reasonable again. Can I suggest a release note for this BZ? This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 12 development cycle. Changing version to '12'. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping This bug was fixed back in August: * Thu Aug 20 2009 Daniel Kopecek <dkopecek> 1.7.1-6 - moved secure_path from compile-time option to sudoers file (#517428) I can confirm things are working in F12: secure_path, env_keep and env_reset (from /etc/sudoers) can be used as expected. Was the man page for SUDOERS(5) ever updated to reflect this change? |