On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 12:15:26PM +0100, Marc Olzheim wrote: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > And the fact that optind is initially set to 1. I wonder what > > could be the implications for setuid programs. There could be > > quite unpredictable results, as the "argv" pointer is incorrectly > > advanced in this case, and at least several setuid programs that > > I've glanced at are vulnerable to this attack. > > See also: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=33738 Thanks Ruslan, Marc, I think kern/33738 is on the money. I do not see any immediate ramifications, but for peace of mind I believe that exec should fail if the argument array pointer is NULL. I believe this would be consistent with the relevant standards: POSIX already requires (a) that the first argument ``should point to a filename that is associated with the process being started'' and (b) ``the last member of this array is a null pointer''--- i.e. the array pointer cannot be NULL. Cheers, -- Jacques Vidrine / [email protected] / [email protected] / [email protected] _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"