On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 16:54 -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 17:50:16 BST, Matthew Booth said:
> 
> > I'm considering expanding argv[0] of EXECVE to be an absolute path.
> 
> I take it you mean "*an* absolute path that was valid when we cut the EXECVE
> record", and document that it may not be *the* actual path used?  In a quarter
> century, I've just seen *too* many race conditions, tricks with ../symlink/foo
> links, and the like (including some interesting malware that would dynamically
> create a symlink and execve through it, just to frustrate attempts at figuring
> out which binary was being exploited).

This would be an issue in a single-pronged approach.

Matt
-- 
Matthew Booth, RHCA, RHCSS
Red Hat, Global Professional Services

M:       +44 (0)7977 267231
GPG ID:  D33C3490
GPG FPR: 3733 612D 2D05 5458 8A8A 1600 3441 EA19 D33C 3490