On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 03:13:10PM -0600, Ariadne Conill wrote:
> Looks good to me, but I wonder if we shouldn't set an argv of
> {bprm->filename, NULL} instead of {"", NULL}. Discussion in IRC led to the
> realization that multicall programs will try to use argv[0] and might crash
> in this scenario. If we're going to fake an argv, I guess we should try to
> do it right.
They're crashing currently, though, yes? I think the goal is to move
toward making execve(..., NULL, NULL) just not work at all. Using the
{"", NULL} injection just gets us closer to protecting a bad userspace
program. I think things _should_ crash if they try to start depending
on this work-around.
--
Kees Cook
