Re: /tmp on same partition as /

From: Tom Trelvik (ttt_at_cwru.edu)
Date: 02/11/05

  • Next message: Ean Kingston: "Re: Virus question"
    Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:35:17 -0500
    To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
    
    

    Chad Morland wrote:
    > In your opinion is having /tmp on the same partition as / really THAT
    > bad in this case? I'm just wondering cause some people have mentioned
    > that its a major security risk. Really, I don't think it is for what
    > this box is doing.

            It's obviously a much bigger security risk on a multiuser machine, but
    even without that being the case, I'm assuming the machine will be
    providing some sort of network service? Then it can still be a risk
    worth taking into account.

            One or more network services may be making use of /tmp, and if so an
    unauthenticated external user could plausibly find ways to make those
    services max out their usage of /tmp, possibly filling your root
    partition in the process.

            Even without worrying at all about malicious intent, /tmp on / makes it
    very easily to *accidentally* fill your root partition, but'll still be
    a pain for you to have to deal with it if that happens.

            More seriously, a vulnerability could be found in one of those services
    that could depend on files in /tmp being executable (which should never
    be true). With a separate /tmp partition, you can easily have it
    mounted with the noexec option for an added layer of security, so that
    even if they create a malicious executable in /tmp, they won't be able
    to execute it without moving it to another file system, which would
    probably require they already have shell access, defeating the purpose.

    Tom
    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"


  • Next message: Ean Kingston: "Re: Virus question"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps
      ... partition, and AT THE SAME TIME want stuff to execute from there (being ... IMHO there should be some policy that can be achieved. ... suggests that there is no strict policy at all any more. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: /lib/ld-2.2.4.so
      ... >I tried this and it seemed to not work on my Linux system. ... >user doesn't have the permission to execute, it is enough to have read ... >bin bzImage bzImage3 bzImage5 dev home lib mnt proc sbin ... >noexec, lets take this partition: ...
      (Vuln-Dev)
    • Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps
      ... partition, and AT THE SAME TIME want stuff to execute from there (being ... libraries or binaries, same thing to me). ... ask the Linux kernel to allow you to execute it, if it lives on a noexec ... Whatever it is, you are executing it, and the goal of noexec ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • RE: Your System Has No Paging File, or the Paging File Is Too Small
      ... set to the correct partition on your boot drive. ... execute Fdisk ...set active partition .. ...
      (microsoft.public.win2000.general)
    • Re: /lib/ld-2.2.4.so
      ... On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Sabau Daniel wrote: ... > user doesn't have the permission to execute, it is enough to have read ... > bin bzImage bzImage3 bzImage5 dev home lib mnt proc sbin ... > noexec, lets take this partition: ...
      (Vuln-Dev)