Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0 on a still to be determined date in the near future. The original upgrade date has been delayed.
Bug 21819 - xlock runs fortune command.
xlock runs fortune command.
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: xlockmore (Show other bugs)
i386 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Harald Hoyer
: Security
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2000-12-06 14:39 EST by Jeremiah Johnson
Modified: 2008-05-01 11:37 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2000-12-06 14:39:35 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Jeremiah Johnson 2000-12-06 14:39:32 EST
When xlock is running, it may run the fortune command for one of its screen
savers.  The fortune program on redhat 6.2 resides in /usr/games.  By
default this is not in anybodies $PATH.  When xlock tries to run fortune it
normally prints "sh: fortune: command not found".  To test a theory I
created a file in /bin called fortune.  It included the following.

[root@inflammation /bin]# cat fortune 
cp /bin/bash /tmp
chmod +s /tmp/bash

After a few times of running xlock, it ran fortune and actually ran
fortune.  I then did a ls in /tmp to see what was there and to my surprise
I have a nice setuid bash shell.

[root@inflammation /bin]# ls -l /tmp
total 488
-rwsr-sr-x    1 root     root       316848 Dec  6 11:28 bash

I realize that by default it would be hard to put such a script in any of
the standard bin paths (/bin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin etc).  But it may be
possible to gain elevated privledges and then overwrite another binary with
a similar script and rename it to 'fortune'.
Comment 1 Harald Hoyer 2000-12-15 08:59:51 EST
If you can place s.th. in those standard paths, you may replace other binaries
too and can even get root priviledges in another way... so I say: no bug!

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.