Re: Re: Busybox on musl is affected by CVE-2015-1817

[u-wsnj@aetey.se]

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 07:48:10PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> > > 2. Reconsider the rejection of the patch to add SOCK_DGRAM support for
> > >    ping, which allows it to run without root.
> > 
> > This seems to lead to a significantly larger code.
> 
> I don't recall the exact amount, but given that busybox's suid
> framework is not taking any precautions to mitigate the risks of suid
> (not to mention that eliminating all suids is a goal of some
> security-conscious systems integrators)

Yes it is here (the goal).

Suid is a very old and nowadays quite redundant tool, mostly holding
ground due to its "simplicity" (say, compared to talking to a daemon)
and to the tradition. Seen from a different perspective, it is from the
pre-network epoch ("the computer is the universe") and enforces among
others hardcoded paths - which is a PITA for reusable and globally
placed software.

> I think it would be worth it
> even if it doubled the size of the ping utility (which it does not).

+1

Rune