Re: CVE-2021-4034: why is pkexec still a thing?

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



On Fri, 2022-01-28 at 11:41 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> 
> "pkexec" is a *short* program, it runs very little code with
> privileges actually. That makes it a *ton* better than the humungous
> code monster that "sudo" is. It has a smaller security footprint, and
> is easier to review than "sudo". That's worth a lot actually.

...and yet despite being so easy to review it somehow had a major
security vulnerability ever since it was written.

Anyway, my point is not really pkexec vs. sudo for interactive use, but
whether pkexec is actually needed by default on all of our editions for
non-interactive use. It's not an easy question to answer since our
packaging doesn't distinguish between something needing *polkit* and
something needing *pkexec*. Though from what we've found in this
thread, it seems like at least GNOME and KDE definitely do still need
it. I'm not enough of a domain expert to know if it's realistic to
rewrite everything in GNOME and KDE that relies on pkexec to use a
different mechanism.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

_______________________________________________
desktop mailing list -- desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora KDE]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Docs]     [Fedora Config]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Red Hat 9]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux