[9fans] today's quiz

[9fans] today's quiz

[ron minnich]

well you all did very well on the 'why bash doesn't run with setuid
bit' so I thought some more fun was in order .

I svn clone the gcc compiler tree. how big is it?

ron

Re: [9fans] today's quiz

[Pietro Gagliardi]

Explain what you mean by it - the source code, the binaries, or both?

On Feb 26, 2008, at 3:51 PM, ron minnich wrote:

> well you all did very well on the 'why bash doesn't run with setuid
> bit' so I thought some more fun was in order .
>
> I svn clone the gcc compiler tree. how big is it?
>
> ron

Re: [9fans] today's quiz

[ron minnich]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Pietro Gagliardi <pietro10@mac.com> wrote:
> Explain what you mean by it - the source code, the binaries, or both?

source only.

ron

Re: [9fans] today's quiz

[Pietro Gagliardi]

And which repository - the trunk?

On Feb 26, 2008, at 3:59 PM, ron minnich wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Pietro Gagliardi
> <pietro10@mac.com> wrote:
>> Explain what you mean by it - the source code, the binaries, or both?
>
> source only.
>
> ron

Re: [9fans] today's quiz

[don bailey]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

ron minnich wrote:
> well you all did very well on the 'why bash doesn't run with setuid
> bit' so I thought some more fun was in order .
>
> I svn clone the gcc compiler tree. how big is it?
>

Bigger than an elephant - smaller than the sun.

D

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHxIKiyWX0NBMJYAcRAoDOAKCagV3T97sTm30kO+Txrj7VxEPSugCeLNoX
dBbzX1luHdMi5q7vLV1enug=
=mV9i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [9fans] today's quiz

[ron minnich]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Pietro Gagliardi <pietro10@mac.com> wrote:
> And which repository - the trunk?

sure

ron

Re: [9fans] today's quiz

[Pietro Gagliardi]

The bleeding-edge, then, would be around 1095600 kilobytes. However,
I don't have subversion on Plan 9, and I'm using my Mac OS X, so
directory sizes may be different.

How could one stand to get the whole damn thing? I needed to modify
one, in a zip, to get gcc built for ELF binaries so I could compile
kernels on Mac OS X. I don't want to risk the nightmare of building
GCC on Plan 9 anymore! :-P

On Feb 26, 2008, at 5:01 PM, ron minnich wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Pietro Gagliardi
> <pietro10@mac.com> wrote:
>> And which repository - the trunk?
>
> sure
>
> ron

Re: [9fans] today's quiz

[hiro]

What a coincidence. Just today i participated in a "Linux Network
Administrator" course. I just went there for the heck of it, not to
learn anything. I was surprised though, about the amount i did learn.
For example I learned about how...
 * gcc
 * Kde
 * Bash
 * Suse
 * Gnu in general
 * Linux in general
 * "Linux Network Administrators"
all suck ass.

One of the biggest highlights was definitely how the mentor tried to
compile gcc.

I was already flooding the machine with ssh login attempts at this
time, because some random PAM feature showed us on the big screen,
that he was changing his root password to a word from the directory.
He did that to prevent us accessing the machine any more, because we
were doing funny stuff with his account after someone got that
password yesterday.

I was waiting for the directory attack to finish for two hours, but
the machine was really slow with that compiler still running.

But I got access to the mentor's ftp in an other lame way and changed plans:
Shortly afterwards I could see him type su, which executed my script in ~/bin/.
He wrote my ssh key to /root/.ssh/authorized_keys with sudo and went
on showing us how to configure the nfs server to be "secure".

Everything got really funny. I made a loop containing "killall
konsole; sleep 360" and interfered with other kde windows in
interesting ways. That is of course annoying if you are trying to
compile gcc in a konsole.
He sadly started X as root then, forcing me to try that vmsplice exploit.
Of course it compiled in a second or so. I played around a little,
tested how fit the mentor was with faults in X configs and just before
the stupid course ended, I finally froze everything in this worthy
condition to prove that shell dos from the other thread was working.
Strangely csh, zsh, csh, tcsh, and even bash were all not vulnerable.
Only zsh proved itself capable of this great feature.

Conclusions:
Linux is not designed for Network Administration.
This would not have happened with Plan 9 from Bell Labs!

Does anyone know other interesting things to try in the rest of the
week? Or should I rather use my time there to learn more about plan9
and inferno?*g*

--
hiro