Can we please stop talking about that sudo bug? It only affects systems using an insane configuration (allow $command as anyone *but* root). I can't come up with any situation where that configuration makes any sense (vs e.g. "allow $command as any member of a given group).
-
-
Since people still don't understand the vulnerable config: you have to allow $someone to sudo into *ANY USER* (not one specifically, *ANY*), which means giving them root, and then add an *exception* to take root away (but still let them become *any* other user).
Show this thread -
To illustrate why this is a ridiculous idea and gives you root anyway even if sudo didn't have the bug: 'adm' is a member of 'disk' which can write to raw block devices, so you can just sudo to 'adm' instead of root and edit the sudoers file, or give suid to /bin/sh.
Show this thread -
So if there are people there who actually had the sample config in the vuln report, they are vulnerable to all hell and back *anyway*, and if they've been trying to play whack-a-mole by excluding all "root-equivalent" user accounts, that's a ridiculous idea and they'll miss one.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
In a well-closed system, sudo is used precisely to give very selective access to a certain account and / or a certain command. It is precisely those systems that will suffer from this bug. So it hits where it hurts the most.
-
No, because the bug only affects sudoers files configured to allow people to run a command as *literally anyone but root*. Not "one user". Literally "any user, including numeric users, except root". That kind of configuration makes *no sense*.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It really seems like only configs with a copy+error or bad search+replace that went unnoticed are effected.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.