RE: [patch] ld.so.8: outline missed cases of secure run

[Maria Guseva <m.guseva-Sze3O3UU22JBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>]

Ping.

On 09/22/2015 11:58 AM, Maria Guseva wrote:

Hello Michael, Yury

> What do you think of the alternative patch below?
Thank you, the patch you proposed looks much better. 

>>> While at it, could you also mention that /etc/suid-debug enables 
>>> LD_DEBUG for suids?
>>
>> Does it? I can't see that in the glibc source. Am I missing something?

>I was looking at process_envvars (in rtld.c): it resets dl_debug_mask for
AT_SECURE binaries unless /etc/suid-debug exists.

So I think it should mentioned in LD_DEBUG environment variable description,
here:

.B LD_DEBUG
-is ignored for set-user-ID/set-group-ID binaries.
+is ignored in secure-execution mode.
+However, if the file
+.IR /etc/suid\-debug
+exists (the content of the file is irrelevant), then .BR LD_DEBUG has 
+an effect in secure-execution mode.
.TP


Regards,
Maria

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html