X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:to:from:subject:date:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s= default; b=wirdDO7oE3+g0znU5hj3w5lHfsZEOpiv7KLbiCOZofv/OtP+zjLOY BrLpRKr0qGFjPnI4hr83nR36QhpGB5c3Q/lu45XkJ+T3xDQ3JSA+IffWBBvytOTN EC8RQY2Qu1f4wfzl8SSkEYYHbUfpuhLt0P+6mSl7s4IZKaC5xblU8Y= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:to:from:subject:date:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=QzZNrmqtgyl6afSIDpqjVb4Z3C0=; b=pUURKcFkcTZtbSf55P7NH5Bl1fuT lyULUkwLjOyFQYvkmBuJQJIGwAs8+8giCcThe4nYtpEozv7Eu5zo5Da/odoS/6zc QLIepnUXsnhGHlr4G13MHREwgC68f0vwS5zfA1axveUHvtOfyfTbWrGkIBQqhfUU pz8pX1XYsNzTzx8= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: plane.gmane.org To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: Andrew Schulman Subject: Re: snapshot 05/05: ssh segmentation fault within screen Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 11:16:54 -0400 Lines: 29 Message-ID: References: <5368525F DOT 2070301 AT shaddybaddah DOT name> <20140506163936 DOT GY30918 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <536920BB DOT 3080102 AT redhat DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive: encrypt X-IsSubscribed: yes > On 05/06/2014 10:39 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > The problem, which I totally not realized since I started implementing > > this stuff is, that by propagating this cache to child processes, said > > child processes suffer from what the parent process does to the passwd > > structures in the cache. > > > > Screen seems to call getpwuid and then sets some of the pointers in the > > passwd structure it got from the call to NULL, apparently for some sort > > of security, this way overwriting the cached passwd struct for the > > Bug in screen. POSIX states: > > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/getpwuid.html > > The application shall not modify the structure to which the return value > points, nor any storage areas pointed to by pointers within the > structure. The returned pointer, and pointers within the structure, > might be invalidated or the structure or the storage areas might be > overwritten by a subsequent call to getpwent(), getpwnam(), or getpwuid(). Fixing this would be well out of my depth, but I'll gladly include any patches to screen that fix it. Meanwhile there's a new release of screen (4.2.1) upstream, about one year newer than the last commit I packaged for Cygwin, so maybe this problem has already been addressed. I'll get the new release out ASAP so we can test. Andrew -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple