First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 64317
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: Gentoo Security <security@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Lisa Seelye (RETIRED) <lisa@gentoo.org>
Add CC:
CC:
Remove selected CCs
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Flags: Requestee:
 
 
  ()

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 64317 depends on: Show dependency tree
Show dependency graph
Bug 64317 blocks:
Votes: 0    Show votes for this bug    Vote for this bug

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)







View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug


Description:   Opened: 2004-09-16 15:04 0000
See: http://distcc.samba.org/security.html

The fix:
emerge sync
emerge --update --pretend >=sys-devel/distcc-2.14
emerge --update >=sys-devel/distcc-2.14
etc-update
Edit /etc/conf.d/distccd and specify for your network --allow and/or --listen
Restart distccd


Hope that is sufficient! This is my first security thingymabob.

------- Comment #1 From Luke Macken (RETIRED) 2004-09-16 16:05:52 0000 -------
This is a huge security hole, and I think a GLSA should be sent.

------- Comment #2 From Mark Mealman 2004-09-16 16:20:19 0000 -------
Also, can we change /etc/conf.d/distccd to include the below option be default?

DISTCCD_OPTS="--allow 192.168.1.0/24"

Users have a habit of just taking the default config and the above line should make their installs more secure. If they need to open up distccd beyond a local network, the above option should also make it obvious as to what setting they need to tweak to securely allow for that.

------- Comment #3 From Lisa Seelye (RETIRED) 2004-09-16 17:50:06 0000 -------
re: comment 2

It's hard to miss my comments in the conf file.  If the users can't take the time to read the documentation then no number of GLSAs will make them RTFM or secure their network.

------- Comment #4 From Matthias Geerdsen 2004-09-17 01:19:29 0000 -------
Lisa, since the first version of the 2.16-r1 ebuild contained a wrong
"PATCHLEVEL" and thus didn't pick up the new config, you should maybe make this
-r2 now. There actually have been people using -r1 before that change.

------- Comment #5 From Mark Mealman 2004-09-17 10:52:47 0000 -------
<< It's hard to miss my comments in the conf file. >>

Heh, actually I missed them because 2.16 and under is using the 2.11.1p patchlevel. But yeah, the 2.17 comments should be fine.

I don't know what the policies are on at what point a GLSA is sent out, but since the 2.16 and under builds don't have any comments on using --allow I'm sure there are a decent number of Gentoo users running distccd completely open. There's been one user in the forums who was hacked due to this already. Some sort of announcement or warning might be helpful for others.

------- Comment #6 From Lisa Seelye (RETIRED) 2004-09-17 11:12:18 0000 -------
I'll bump 2.16 to -r2...

re comment 5: all of the distcc ebuilds are on 2.17 patchlevel.

------- Comment #7 From Lisa Seelye (RETIRED) 2004-09-17 12:12:08 0000 -------
2.16 bumped to -r2

------- Comment #8 From Surakshan Mendis 2004-09-17 17:01:38 0000 -------
is it possible for a ebuild "beep" warning message to READ the config file. I
know one should do it etc... but some people don't because it just works (tm).

I tried the metasploit framework 2.2 and I can execute system commands as
distcc user -- way to easy

------- Comment #9 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2004-09-19 11:39:20 0000 -------
I agree the default configuration should be closed, forcing people to update
and read the comments. However, the behaviour is by design. This bug summary
("remote network vulnerability") is false : there is no vulnerability here,
that's the way distcc works. And the docs make it quite clear.

I don't think we should issue a GLSA about this, otherwise we should also issue
one for SSHD telling people not to forget to set root passwords...

Security: please comment.

------- Comment #10 From Matthias Geerdsen 2004-09-19 13:34:48 0000 -------
I agree with Koon... don't think there should be a GLSA and I would change the
default behaviour so that the installation is save by default and will have to
be changed to work.

A warning should probably also appear in the distcc guide at
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/distcc.xml

------- Comment #11 From Luke Macken (RETIRED) 2004-09-19 17:08:41 0000 -------
Contradicting my message above, I think that the ewarn's are sufficient enough
and we don't need a GLSA for this.

------- Comment #12 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2004-09-20 05:42:18 0000 -------
Closed without GLSA

------- Comment #13 From Luke Macken (RETIRED) 2004-10-05 07:20:19 0000 -------
*** Bug 66424 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #14 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2004-10-05 07:45:16 0000 -------
*** Bug 66424 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug