This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]


On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 05:43:26PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> This patch is missing a NEWS update to discuss the new feature.  (It seems 
> the manual generally lacks documentation of LD_* variables; if they were 
> documented, an update there would be needed as well.)

I will add a NEWS entry.

> The commit message needs to discuss security issues (that applies to any 
> proposed change to glibc that makes its behavior depend on some 
> environment variable, probably we should add that point to the 
> contribution checklist).  What effect does this have in setuid programs?  
> Is it ignored, by existing or new code?  If not ignored, how can you 
> demonstrate that to be safe in all cases where LD_PRELOAD is handled and 
> safe for such programs?

It is not ignored right now, but there's no reason it shouldn't be.

Perhaps it would be better to have the new variable take a list of
libraries just like LD_PRELOAD does, instead of having it modify
LD_PRELOAD's behaviour?  Then the security handling for the new variable
could be exactly the same as LD_PRELOAD's?

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]