As far as I can see, this hasn't changed in UNIX for the last 15 years.
If a parent process is root (either EUID or UID) forks, the child process
still has the same (EUID/UID) priveleges. If it execs another program, the
child still has the same priveleges (that of the greatest privelege).
>Also, I think I have read (recently) that, for a program to function
>suid-root, it must be owned by root and exist in a root-owned directory.
Not on any system I have access to (Sun, Cray, SGI, and Linux).
>This does not seem to be in current implementation, I can make a suid-root
>program, put it in a directory owned by 200.200, and it still shows
>the EUID as 0.
Normal activity. Membership in a directory cannot determine wether a parent
directory is/is not root owned. Consider the case of a single disk system:
a user may establish a hard link to /bin/passwd. Now: is the parent directory
that the suid-root passwd program owned by root? There are now two parent
directories - one is owned by root, one is not. Both are valid.
>...
>The EUID should have remained at 100.
>
>It does comply with the rule about root ownership, but the directory
>can be owned by anybody.
This is normal.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesse I Pollard, II
Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil
Any opinions expressed are solely my own.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/