URGENT: REDHAT 6.1 STORES SAMBA PRIVATE FILES IN /etc

[Sean E. Millichamp]

On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:

> i acknowledge that there is not a security hole in redhat 6.1 
> default installation: it requires modification.  it is the
> modification or deliberate exploitation that scares me.

Luke,

I understand the security issues regarding the readability of those files.  
I have to agree with Jeremy Allison though, if the admin is going to start
changing permissions without knowledge of how that will affect things then
they are likely to make other mistakes that will compromise the security
of their system.

However, if you are concered about the permissions of the files then
perhaps Samba should be modified so that upon starting it will check the
permissions of the security-critical files and refuse to execute if the
permissions don't match some minimum that you decide is safe.  I have used
other software before that enforces such permissions.  I believe fetchmail
run as root enforces a certain level of permissions on the
/etc/fetchmail.conf file so that POP/IMAP passwords can't be left
vulnerable, for example.

This would still have the potential of having the data available for a
while, but if Samba refused to run it would make even the most
incompentent administrator take time to stop and figure out why.  It could
be put very clearly and visibly in the logs with the recommended
permissions.

Best,
Sean

------------------------------------------
 Sean E. Millichamp, Consultant
 Ingematics - A Division of Compu-Aid, Inc.