Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 104480 - app-emulation/vmware-workstation: glibc 2.3.4 means security hole
Summary: app-emulation/vmware-workstation: glibc 2.3.4 means security hole
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Security
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Default Configs (show other bugs)
Hardware: x86 Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Security
URL: http://www.vmware.com/community/threa...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-09-01 06:37 UTC by Jakob Schiotz
Modified: 2005-09-17 06:44 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jakob Schiotz 2005-09-01 06:37:54 UTC
From a discussion on the VMWare workstation support forums, I learned that
VMWare workstation in combination with glibc 2.3.4 or 2.3.5 is a security risk
(see discussion in the URL above).  The problem is that from glibc 2.3.4 setuid
works per process instead of per thread, so some multithreaded setuid
applications suddently have all threads running as root.  The symptom is a file
written as the root user, presumably one can make accidents by letting it be a
softlink somewhere else - and presumably many other things can go wrong.



Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Comment 1 Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-09-02 02:53:19 UTC
Not sure what the solution would be here. We can't exactly force vmware users to
downgrade to 2.3.3... Pulling in vmware team for comments.
Comment 2 Jakob Schiotz 2005-09-02 04:08:37 UTC
Not sure there is a solution :-(

VMware workstation 5.0 and above work around the problem.  But since you have to
pay for licenses, some may be stuck with 4.5 - I for one do not need the new
features in 5.0.

Also, I am not sure to what extend fixing this really helps security, since one
can create new virtual machines with access to the raw disks, and probably cause
a security breach that way (I think).

Perhaps the *real* solution would be to revert the "broken" behaviour of glibc
(broken as in "broken as designed", not as in buggy), but that might break
countless other programs ?

Jakob

Comment 3 Chris Gianelloni (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-09-02 07:17:02 UTC
About the only thing we *can* do is package.mask VMware versions < 5.0 and give
a big fat warning to users.  There's a possibility that a future
vmware-any-any-update version might resolve this issue, but for now, there isn't
much that we can do about it.
Comment 4 Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-09-02 10:17:11 UTC
That's what I would push for if there was a clear exploitation path. But if the
"suddenly all threads as root" phenomenon is not predictable, I can't see it
exploited... or is it ?
Comment 5 Jakob Schiotz 2005-09-02 11:45:48 UTC
I think it is quite consistent that all threads run as root, but if it is
exploitable?  Well, ~/.vmware/preferences is overwritten by root, but if I make
it a softlink somewhere else, the link is not followed.

I do not think that a vmware-any-any-update will come, it was Petr Vandrovec
(the author of these updates) who told me about the problem - he seemed quite
annoyed at the glibc change, which happened a while ago.

/Jakob
Comment 6 Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-09-07 07:31:32 UTC
Setting this to Auditing so that we find an exploitable hole before making any move.
Comment 7 Tavis Ormandy (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-09-13 04:17:57 UTC
Nothing audit team can do here.

I would suggest vmware team modifies vmware ebuild to install a vmware group, 
then only make vmware-vmx executable by users in group vmware. This way, the 
system administrator can add trusted users to this group. A stern ewarn stating 
that vmware access can be used for evil would then solve this issue.

Moving component to `Default configs`.
Comment 8 Chris Gianelloni (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-09-16 12:06:07 UTC
All versions of vmware-workstation (not just < 5) now use a vmware group.  This
can be resolved as it applies to those packages.
Comment 9 Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-09-17 06:44:29 UTC
Looks good to me, please reopen if you feel this needs more care.