Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re: Only the beginning (Score 1) 236

by peppepz (#48001849) Attached to: First Shellshock Botnet Attacking Akamai, US DoD Networks

In terms of the ratio of Linux distributions which use Bash as the default shell versus those that do not, the vast majority still use Bash.

Even if this is true, and no I haven't checked it, it has no relevance over the reality of how many people are effectively using Bash together with the Linux kernel, which is a matter of which distributions people effectively use. I do aknowledge that RedHat-derived distributions are probably more common on servers, but I'm just guessing that out of prejudice.

Debian-based distributions use dash as the default system shell, but Bash remains the default interactive shell,

If you really had a server of any kind which spawned a *real user login shell* as a result of a remote client request of any kind, then you would already have a huge security problem. Moreover, I expect lots of people will use Bash as their persoanl shell even on BSDs as it's so much better than Tcsh.

and many scripts specify #!/bin/bash in their shebang line.

Then they are as broken on FreeBSD (or any other OS) as well as they are on Linux distributions that haven't Bash as the system shell.

That last bit is important, because we're living in times where an increasing number of developers are releasing code for network daemons which are designed to be easily run under unprivileged user accounts by those same users. Regardless of how secure the daemons themselves may be, the simple fact that they're executed with Bash as their parent process means they're vectors for system compromise from bugs like Shellshock.

How so? The bug is triggered when you start a buggy Bash shell having a malicious environment variable set up by the parent. Having Bash itself as a parent isn't a problem, because the bug is triggered when the environment is parsed at Bash's startup time (the shell might even crash afterwards).

The karma bonus posting option is enabled by default for a reason. When people who have an established track record of saying meaningful things (as determined by the up-modded metric) post comments, those comments are automatically ranked higher. Likewise, the moderation system provides for down-modding of any given comment, which has the side effect of karma reduction for the "offending" poster. The fact that you don't like what someone has to say is really of little consequence unless you have mod points; this is by design.

The karma bonus is there as a measure to let *you* moderate your own comments. If you consider 2,000 characters of condescendension as something that is worth promoting, good for you, but don't expect other readers to share your conviction.

Comment: Re: Only the beginning (Score 2) 236

by peppepz (#48001215) Attached to: First Shellshock Botnet Attacking Akamai, US DoD Networks
Now you just have to find some server package which allows an unnprivileged remote client to trigger the execution of a Zimbra init script.

The funny thing is that, should you find it, such package would be vulnerable on FreeBSD in the exactly same way as it were on Linux, nullifying the argument that you are trying to make, about the Bash bug being a "Linux bug" that FreeBSD users shouldn't worry about.

Comment: Re: Only the beginning (Score 1) 236

by peppepz (#48001187) Attached to: First Shellshock Botnet Attacking Akamai, US DoD Networks

I have never seen this even by the BSD folks. I think you are delusional.

Look at the comments of every slashdot story about some BSD, when the topic of market share comes out.

I won't post links to individual comments here, because I would find it both rude and pedantic.

For most users OSX will have no exposure even though it has the vulnerable Bash.

It depends on wether /bin/sh points to bash on OSX.

It does not use dhclient nor does it use a shell for processing DHCP, instead it uses the ipconfig agent.

Not to mention the fact that if people are connecting their machines to rogue DHCP servers, they're compromised anyway.

Sharing is disabled by default and this includes SSH. Only folks that explicitly run remote services or use the Server product will be exposed.

It's not that the typical Linux distribution opens telnet to the world by default, either.

Comment: Re: Only the beginning (Score 1) 236

by peppepz (#48000837) Attached to: First Shellshock Botnet Attacking Akamai, US DoD Networks

Please tell us all how many Linux-based systems you operate that run only a bare kernel.

In the meantime I've told you how many Linux-based systems don't use bash as their default shell. The reality being opposite to your arbitrary statement that "the vast majority" of them do.

and the Karma Bonus

Who cares about that?

You should. Its purpose is to override other people's posts when you have something important to say.

Wrong. It's not personal, really.

[...]

You can always phone RMS up if want to have a nice "omg yes Linux is not GNU and GNU is not Linux" conversation.

Plonk.

That particular point has no value in this context, as the discussion here is on complete operating systems, not bare kernels.

Did he laugh about Debian/kFreeBSD? Did he laugh about OSX? Did he laugh about Cygwin or SUA? No, but he laughed about a minority subset of Linux distributions, and called them "Linux", having an uninformed reader believe that the bug is in Linux (it isn't) or that all Linux distributions are affected (many aren't). He was so aware of this fact, that he posted anonymously.

Which is not to say that this bug isn't serious, because it's huge. It's to say that this is not a "Linux bug", in any possible meaning of the phrase, strict or lax.

Comment: Re: Only the beginning (Score -1, Flamebait) 236

by peppepz (#48000551) Attached to: First Shellshock Botnet Attacking Akamai, US DoD Networks
You fail to appreciate the difference between Linux and Bash (there's Linux with no Bash, there's Bash with no Linux). You fail to appreciate the fact that no, the most popular Linux distributions don't ship with Bash as the default shell. And yet you invest almost two thousand letters, and the Karma Bonus, doing the condescendent and attacking me personally. If you were trying to appear funny, in my opinion, you aren't. If you were trying to appear smart, then you had better get your facts right before attempting to.

Comment: Re: Only the beginning (Score 3, Interesting) 236

by peppepz (#48000483) Attached to: First Shellshock Botnet Attacking Akamai, US DoD Networks
Debian doesn't. Ubuntu doesn't. Anything embedded doesn't. OSX does. There's nothing to "laugh at Linux" for, because even leaving aside the fact, as huge as a house, that this is not a bug of Linux, we must take into account that Bash isn't used on all Linux distributions, is used on many non-Linux unices, and can be installed on non-Unix systems where it'll see environment variables too. I also register with amusement the fact that OSX gets pulled by the coat into the BSD family when it's time to calculate market share, but is carefully set aside now that the distinction is convenient.

Comment: Self-healing drivers (Score 2) 93

by peppepz (#47917329) Attached to: New Release of MINIX 3 For x86 and ARM Is NetBSD Compatible
Don't present userspace drivers as a panacea for all kinds of driver troubles: when a driver fails, it can make the hardware it drives hang your machine solid from the hardware's side, or make said hardware DMA all over your RAM with complete disregard any CPU-imposed protection; there's no safe recovery from such a situation, and in this case applications had better be stopped even if they appear to be still running.

Comment: Re: Would be nice to see Scala replace Java (Score 1) 94

by peppepz (#47844581) Attached to: Scala Designer Martin Odersky On Next Steps
Please read the post I was replying to, it was claiming that checking for object value equality using == sometimes works. That's what doesn't work, and rightfully so. Sorry if it wasn't clear, but unfortunately I'm using the mobile site and I can't find the "quote parent" option.

Comment: Re: Would be nice to see Scala replace Java (Score 1) 94

by peppepz (#47842223) Attached to: Scala Designer Martin Odersky On Next Steps
No, it never works. Ever. For any kind of object. Comparing references instead of values is logically wrong, it does not make sense, and it "works" with compiler-generated structures in the same way as comparing C strings with == instead of strcmp() may happen to "work", or comparing C arrays using > may happen to "work". The difference between a value and a reference is a very basic concept of programming, and in the case of Java it's explained very early in learning courses. If anything, languages that allow complexity-hiding features such as the overloading of == are much better puzzler-generators than the simple, elegant, plain Java. Which didn't even have autoboxing originally.

Debug is human, de-fix divine.

Working...