Re: [Full-disclosure] Apache suEXEC privilege elevation / inform
I have been a silent spectator to this drama, and could not resist adding a f=
ew thoughts of my own:
1. All software, especially webservers, should ship with secure defaults. Pe=
riod. It is a fundamental mistake to assume all admins who roll out web apps=
and maintain servers RTFM before rolling out. The key idea here is "time to=
market", and there is huge amount of data to prove this.
2. Apache clearly does not ship with secure defaults in favor of convenience=
? disable_functions is a example - do you expect an admin to be a unix expe=
rt or know what each parameter in there means? Also indicates this was added=
in reactively, and not accounted for in the core design. Why not enable_fun=
ctions instead, with everything disabled to begin with? (Oh, that wouldn't h=
elp you achieve world dominance and fast!)
3. Secure by design, implementation, and deployment isn't utopia, it's very m=
uch an achievable target. But then it wouldn't feed bugtraq anymore or the b=
illion dollar industry called as "security industry" would it?
Huge amount of software today is turd polishing, open source no exception (t=
hough it is supposed to have better track record). The blame lies squarely o=
n everyone.
-coderaptor
--
sent via 100% recycled electrons from my mobile command center.
On Aug 11, 2013, at 3:30 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@thelounge.net> wrote:
>=20
>=20
> Am 11.08.2013 23:56, schrieb Stefan Kanthak:
>> "Reindl Harald" <h.reindl@thelounge.net> wrote:
>>> again:
>>> symlinks are to not poision always and everywhere
>>> they become where untrusted customer code is running
>>> blame the admin which doe snot know his job and not
>>> the language offering a lot of functions where some
>>> can be misused
>>=20
>> Again: symlinks are well-known as attack vector for years!
>=20
> and that's why any admin which is not clueless
> disables the symlink function - but there exists
> code which *is* secure, runs in a crontrolled
> environment and make use of it for good reasons
>=20
>> It's not the user/administrator who develops or ships insecure code!
>=20
> but it's the administrator which has the wrong job if
> create symlinks is possible from any random script
> running on his servers
>=20
> anyways, i am done with this thread
>=20
> the topic is *not* "Apache suEXEC privilege elevation" it
> is "admins not secure their servers" - period
>=20
>=20
討論串 (同標題文章)
完整討論串 (本文為第 15 之 32 篇)：