Article View: comp.bugs.sys5
Article #691Re: setuid(2) bug?
From: R.L. Welsh (decuac!macom1!rikki)
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1988 18:07
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1988 18:07
24 lines
1320 bytes
1320 bytes
From article <679@rivm05.UUCP>, by ccement@rivm.UUCP (Martien F v Steenbergen): > > According to the (System V) manuals from AT&T, Uniq, Nuxi and > Xenix the chapter about the setuid(2) system call lists: > > "...<Setuid> will fail if the real user ID of the > calling process is not equal to <uid> and its effective > user ID is not super-user. [EPERM]..." > The paragraph right before the above says: "If the effective user ID of the calling process is not super-user, but the saved set-user ID from exec(2) is equal to uid, the effective ID is set to uid." By having the setuid bit on in the executable, you are forcing the job to run as jim (effective ID = 100) which is equal to <uid>. Looks like it does what it should to me. -- Rikki Welsh Centel Information Systems 5515 Security Lane, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, (301) 984-3636 UUCP: decuac!macom1!rikki
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<3194@macom1.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!decvax!ucbvax!pasteur!ames!think!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!umd5!decuac!macom1!rikkiReferences:
<679@rivm05.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!decvax!ucbvax!pasteur!ames!think!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!umd5!decuac!macom1!rikki From: rikki@macom1.UUCP (R.L. Welsh (decuac!macom1!rikki)) Newsgroups: comp.bugs.sys5 Subject: Re: setuid(2) bug? Message-ID: <3194@macom1.UUCP> Date: 17 Feb 88 18:07:16 GMT References: <679@rivm05.UUCP> Organization: CENTEL Business Information Systems INC.,Rockville, MD. Lines: 24