• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Security framework refuses to work at all
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Security framework refuses to work at all


  • Subject: Re: Security framework refuses to work at all
  • From: Stéphane Sudre <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 15:17:51 +0200

On Friday, October 25, 2002, at 02:58 PM, Finlay Dobbie wrote:


On Friday, October 25, 2002, at 01:40 pm, Stiphane Sudre wrote:

From what I can quickly read in this documentation (which is buggy as the link: http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/macosx/CoreTechnologies/ securityservices/authservices.html does not exist), I don't see anything done that is strictly not recommended by the documentation.

Some privileged operations require special permissions. For example, an application that restarts the Internet daemon must have root privileges. There are three possible ways to perform this operation, all with their own problems:

 Make the application run as root by calling itself with a special Authorization Services function.

mv is not my application.

 Set the setuid bit of the application and change its owner to root and use the special Authorization Services function.

I'm not going to setuid 'mv' to do this.

 Factor out the operation that performs the privileged operation and put it in a separate setuid toola tool that has its setuid bit setand set the setuid tool's owner to root.

Don't see the interest of that for 'mv'.

Both the first and second options are a security breach waiting to happen.

Sure.

[...]The third scenario is by far the best. The application is split into an application that controls all of the graphical user interface elements and nonprivileged operations, and a helper tool that performs only the operations involved in restarting the Internet daemon. The helper tool's setuid bit is set and the owner is set to root. The proper Authorization Services functions are used as described previously. Factoring and setting the setuid bit not only minimizes the risk but also makes it easier to audit your code for security holes.

This is the 12 years scenario. With a setuid bit...

[...]
Special Considerations

You should use this function only to allow installers to run as root and to allow a setuid tool to repair its setuid bit if lost. This function works only if the Security Server establishes proper authorization.

This function poses a security concern because it will indiscriminately run any tool or application, severely increasing the security risk.

This is the line I don't agree with. It will not run any tool, it will run the tool I set in the path as stated by the documentation:

"This function enables you to execute the tool you specify in the pathToTool parameter as a separate, privileged process."
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Security framework refuses to work at all
      • From: Kelly K <email@hidden>
    • Re: Security framework refuses to work at all
      • From: Jan Van Boghout <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: Security framework refuses to work at all (From: Finlay Dobbie <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: drawers closes, but is visible
  • Next by Date: Re: [OT] Help Viewer blows
  • Previous by thread: Re: Security framework refuses to work at all
  • Next by thread: Re: Security framework refuses to work at all
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread