Re: FUD about security and file extensions (was Re: Why file content sniffing sucks)

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

 



Adam Williams wrote:
1. Windows hides the .exe
2. Even if windows does not have the .exe, the users are able to execute
attached programs.

So you're advocating that all users know what .exe means. Oh, and .pl, .py, .sh, etc etc. Yes, that's really a solution... not. Or are you advocating that we kill email functionality by disallowing the manual opening of attachments to protect the user?


This debate is ludicrous.

A - You can't execute a program on UNIX that isn't set as executable. Someone makes temporary files as executable? Not that I've ever seen.

$ ls -l /tmp/foo -rw-r--r-- 1 esoteric users 5 2003-12-26 17:52 /tmp/foo $ cat /tmp/foo date $ /bin/sh /tmp/foo Fri Dec 26 17:53:55 EST 2003

/tmp/foo is not executable.

It would depend on how it is called. I don't know, but I suspect that nautilus calls /bin/sh to execute in such a case?

--
Until later, Geoffrey	esoteric@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Building secure systems inspite of Microsoft

_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list@xxxxxxxxx
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Trinity Users]     [KDE]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux