Removing geteuid() != 0 check in smbldap_open()
abartlet at samba.org
Sat Oct 18 02:59:32 GMT 2008
On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 14:03 -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 07:50:17AM +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > I added this code originally to avoid security bugs where smbpasswd
> > operations would fail (unable to open the file), but LDAP operations
> > would succeed.
> If we're checking at the upper levels for remote access correctly (ie. at the lanman,
> samr and lsa layers), then this check is not needed.
> I'm auditing the code in lanman.c, srv_lsa_nt.c and srv_samr_nt.c
> right now to ensure we always do access checks first. (lanman.c
> is trivially clean btw).
> > But the reverse must also be true, so how do you intend to handle this
> > for tdb and smbpasswd backed systems?
> Don't understand what "the reverse must also be true" means here.
If we are not root for these operations against smbpasswd or tdbsam, how
do we open the on-disk files?
> > The other reason to keep this is that as non-root, will we always have
> > access to the ldapi socket, if so configured? Normally it is
> > world-accessible (but a sysadmin might restrict it), but if we ever add
> > support for SASL EXTERNAL binds to our directory server, it will need to
> > be root during that bind (so OpenLDAP can verify we are privileged via
> > the getpeerid call).
> Then I'll add the become_root()/unbecome_root() pair around this
> call instead.
> The problem is that every single bug report we've ever had on this
> code (and we've had quite a few) has involved us adding become_root()
> unbecome_root() pairs around more and more areas.
> This is the wrong thing to do. To be honest, we should just
> add become_root()/unbecome_root() wrappers on all the passdb
> operations so they'll never fail due to privilage errors and
> always check at the incoming RPC/remote layer for the correct
> privilage before starting the operation.
> This is much closer to the way Windows operates.
That seems entirely reasonable.
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20081018/0adf1558/attachment.bin
More information about the samba-technical