this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2024
78 points (90.6% liked)

Linux

56494 readers
856 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 71 points 1 year ago (3 children)

......I feel like openssh has a much larger attack surface than a simple binary.

If you're going to this extent already, you may as well jump on the run0 approach systemd is introducing.

oh no, I can hear rumbling

[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 year ago

…I feel like openssh has a much larger attack surface than a simple binary.

Right. This is just trading one set of security pitfalls with a second, much worse set of security pitfalls.

[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org -3 points 1 year ago

alias run0=sudo

(not really; I'd rather not introduce an alias or any sort of symbolic behaviour that would teach me to expect that systemd crap is available on a system. The less you rely on it, the better)

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Seems novel. But from a security aspect, if OpenSSH has security vulnerability that allows an unauthenticated user to login, via whatever means, once you are in the system as a non-privileged user, you are now free to use the same vulnerability to get root.

Basically this exercise is like using two locks that have the same key to open them. If the same key opens them, then a weakness in one, is now a weakness in the other so why bother with two identical locks?

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

......I feel like openssh has a much larger attack surface than a simple binary.

If you're going to this extent already, you may as well jump on the run0 approach systemd is introducing.

oh no, I can hear rumbling

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A better implementation than run0.

[–] doona@aussie.zone 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] kbal@fedia.io 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It has some advantages. It can be configured with simple text files and normal filesystem permissions. The sshd code is mature and has a proven record of good security. It doesn't add yet another thing to systemd that has no business being part of systemd.

[–] doona@aussie.zone 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I really don’t get why an alias to something that would be in systemd anyway (that’s all run0 is, an alias to systemd-run) would be an issue. Is systemd-run problematic or something?

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The problem is that they're trying to frame it as a better replacement for sudo when it's really not.

In some respects, it's safer by not using a setuid binary. In other respects, it massively increases the surface area by relying on the correctness of three separate daemons: systemd, dbus, and polkitd. If any one of those components are misconfigured, you risk an unauthorized user gaining root privileges.

With sudo, the main concern is the sudo process being exploited through memory safety bugs since it runs at root automatically.

Don't get me wrong, sudo has a lot of stupid decisions and problems. There's a ton of code in sudo for features that almost nobody uses, and there's bound to be bugs in there somewhere. It needs to be replaced with something simpler, but run0 is not that.

[–] dino@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago

systemd, dbus, and polkitd. If any one of those components are misconfigured, you risk an unauthorized user gaining root privileges.

Just for my own understanding, if any of those are misconfigured, do you not anyway have a big security problem already, regardless of run0?

[–] doona@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago

Thank you for a non-hand-wavy response! I’m not entirely sure I agree, depending on more libraries doesn’t have to be an issue if they’re well designed and frequently used elsewhere, no? Is the implication here that systemd isn’t well designed?

In any case, would you say sudo is the best we have for temporary root elevation at the moment? I haven’t really heard of an alternative apart from doas.