.. | .. |
---|
19 | 19 | etc) to extract additional credentials and continue to expand the scope |
---|
20 | 20 | of their attack without resorting to user-assisted phishing. |
---|
21 | 21 | |
---|
22 | | -This is not a theoretical problem. SSH session hijacking |
---|
23 | | -(http://www.storm.net.nz/projects/7) and arbitrary code injection |
---|
24 | | -(http://c-skills.blogspot.com/2007/05/injectso.html) attacks already |
---|
| 22 | +This is not a theoretical problem. `SSH session hijacking |
---|
| 23 | +<https://www.blackhat.com/presentations/bh-usa-05/bh-us-05-boileau.pdf>`_ |
---|
| 24 | +and `arbitrary code injection |
---|
| 25 | +<https://c-skills.blogspot.com/2007/05/injectso.html>`_ attacks already |
---|
25 | 26 | exist and remain possible if ptrace is allowed to operate as before. |
---|
26 | 27 | Since ptrace is not commonly used by non-developers and non-admins, system |
---|
27 | 28 | builders should be allowed the option to disable this debugging system. |
---|
.. | .. |
---|
64 | 65 | Using ``PTRACE_TRACEME`` is unchanged. |
---|
65 | 66 | |
---|
66 | 67 | 2 - admin-only attach: |
---|
67 | | - only processes with ``CAP_SYS_PTRACE`` may use ptrace |
---|
68 | | - with ``PTRACE_ATTACH``, or through children calling ``PTRACE_TRACEME``. |
---|
| 68 | + only processes with ``CAP_SYS_PTRACE`` may use ptrace, either with |
---|
| 69 | + ``PTRACE_ATTACH`` or through children calling ``PTRACE_TRACEME``. |
---|
69 | 70 | |
---|
70 | 71 | 3 - no attach: |
---|
71 | 72 | no processes may use ptrace with ``PTRACE_ATTACH`` nor via |
---|