Re[2]: SECURITY.NNOV: file locking and security (group policy DoS on Windows 2000 domain)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello Seth,

I never intended to review all possible locking mechanism. In advisory I
ment  BSD-compliant  flock()/fcntl()/open()  file locking implemented in
most unix-like systems.

X/Open  lockf()  mechanism ported to few operation systems requires file
to be open for writing, so, it's behind advisory (I'm talking about READ
access).

P.S. I don't use linux.

--Saturday, December 08, 2001, 4:15:48 AM, you wrote to bugtraq@securityfocus.com:

SA> On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 11:57:58AM +0300, 3APA3A wrote:
>> The way file locks interfere with file access depends on OS. There are 2
>> possible  situations:  moderate  and  non-moderate  file locks. *BSD and
>> linux  use  non-moderate  locking, while Windows NT locking is moderate.
>> What  does it mean? Under Unix file locking is only checked then another
>> application  tries  to  lock  the  file. If application doesn't use file
>> locking  it  will  not be affected by file locking.

SA> 3APA3A -- close....

SA> A long-time feature of many Unix systems, including Linux (and probably
SA> all the BSDs too, but I don't know this for sure) is mandatory file
SA> locking, implemented in the kernel. It can be turned on using the setgid
SA> bit on regular files.

SA> Look for Documentation/mandatory.txt in the linux kernel source tree. It
SA> has all the gory details on mandary file locking, as it is implemented
SA> in the linux kernel. (Or, was implemented, in 1996.. :)

SA> Cheers!


-- 
~/ZARAZA
Ñýð Èñààê Íüþòîí îòêðûë, ÷òî ÿáëîêè ïàäàþò íà çåìëþ. (Òâåí)


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Security]     [Netfilter]     [PHP]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]

  Powered by Linux