Bug 697236 - installer fails to detect corrupt /etc/fedora-release
Summary: installer fails to detect corrupt /etc/fedora-release
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: anaconda
Version: 15
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Anaconda Maintenance Team
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-04-17 04:33 UTC by Steve Tyler
Modified: 2011-04-19 17:53 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-04-18 23:54:21 UTC
Type: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)
screenshot showing installer offering to upgrade from "Fedora 1" (57.48 KB, image/png)
2011-04-17 04:33 UTC, Steve Tyler
no flags Details
this is what happens when you do not do your md5sums ... :-) (57.32 KB, image/png)
2011-04-17 04:50 UTC, Steve Tyler
no flags Details

Description Steve Tyler 2011-04-17 04:33:12 UTC
Created attachment 492658 [details]
screenshot showing installer offering to upgrade from "Fedora 1"

Description of problem:
The installer accepts the contents of /etc/fedora-release without verifying it against the RPM database.

This results in the installer offering to upgrade "Fedora 1" (attached screenshot).

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
F15-Beta-Final

How reproducible:
Always.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Complete a clean, full-disk, minimal install from the DVD:
   $ qemu-kvm -m 1024 -cdrom Fedora-15-Beta-i386-DVD.iso -hda ../f15-test1.img -boot menu=on
2. Boot into the installed system and log in as root.
3. # vi /etc/fedora-release
4. Change the release to "Fedora 1".
5. Reboot from the DVD.

Actual results:
Installer offers to upgrade "Fedora 1".

Expected results:
Installer notices there's something going on:
# rpm -V fedora-release

Additional info:
Bug 697047 - "Cannot Upgrade" message reinstalling onto VM disk image after cancelled install
Bug 697193 - "Cannot Upgrade" message vague about "current installation"

Comment 1 Steve Tyler 2011-04-17 04:50:13 UTC
Created attachment 492661 [details]
this is what happens when you do not do your md5sums ... :-)

Comment 2 Brian Lane 2011-04-18 23:54:21 UTC
We have to trust something. Trusting the file on disk to be correct doesn't seem unreasonable. If you are hitting this problem via some normal activity, please include the details.

Comment 3 Steve Tyler 2011-04-19 12:56:51 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> We have to trust something. Trusting the file on disk to be correct doesn't
> seem unreasonable. If you are hitting this problem via some normal activity,
> please include the details.

Applications that "trust" their input expose users to hackers.

Buffer Overflow Attacks and Their Countermeasures
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6701

SQL Injection
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms161953.aspx

Comment 4 Steve Tyler 2011-04-19 13:12:41 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > We have to trust something. Trusting the file on disk to be correct doesn't
> > seem unreasonable. If you are hitting this problem via some normal activity,
> > please include the details.
> 
> Applications that "trust" their input expose users to hackers.
> 
> Buffer Overflow Attacks and Their Countermeasures
> http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6701
> 
> SQL Injection
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms161953.aspx

Indeed, the installer should be checking digital signatures before trusting anything on a device of unknown provenance.

RPM packages have digital signatures ...

Comment 5 Steve Tyler 2011-04-19 17:53:04 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> We have to trust something. Trusting the file on disk to be correct doesn't
> seem unreasonable. If you are hitting this problem via some normal activity,
> please include the details.

"normal activity":

Sysadmins sometimes make mistakes, e.g. by copying a file to the wrong place ...

And sysadmins might neglect to run "rpm -Va '*'" periodically.


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