$HOME/.local/bin in $PATH
aph at redhat.com
Fri Nov 1 18:12:47 UTC 2013
On 11/01/2013 09:38 AM, drago01 wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 10/30/2013 10:27 AM, Alec Leamas wrote:
>>> On 2013-10-30 11:23, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>> Am 30.10.2013 11:20, schrieb Alec Leamas:
>>>>> On 2013-10-30 10:58, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>>>> Am 30.10.2013 10:53, schrieb Alec Leamas:
>>>>>>> Some kind of reference for the bad in having a well-known, hidden directory in the path?
>>>>>> the *writeable for the user* is the problem
>>>>> Any reference for this problem?
>>>> what about consider the implications?
>>>> do you really need a written reference for any security relevant fact?
>>>> i can write one for you if you prefer links :-)
>>> Well, the question is really if someone else out there share your
>>> concerns about this.
>> Why does it matter? A hidden directory in everyone's path is obviously
>> useful to an attacker, and (IMO) more useful to an attacker than to a user.
> The attacker needs to be able to write to your home directory to
> take advantage of it. And if he can do that (you lost) he has
> numerous other ways of doing it.
That is true. However, there is an advantage to this one for the
attacker: the user probably doesn't know it's there.
It's a matter of the attack surface: the 'sum of the different points
(the "attack vectors") where an unauthorized user (the "attacker") can
try to enter.' [Wikipedia]
Having a writable and hidden directory in everyone's path increases
the attack surface. Having the current working directory in
everyone's path increases the attack surface, etc, etc. Defence in
depth is about reducing the attack surface.
More information about the devel