• lemmyvore@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    If I get into your non-privileged account I can set up a program that acts like sudo and I bet 99% of people will never notice they just gave their password away. And even if they do it’s too late anyway because I’ve just compromised root and locked everybody out and I’m in there shitting on the filesystems or whatever. Because root can do anything.

    And if I can’t break into your non-privileged account then I can’t break into a privileged account either.

    These artificial distinctions between “non-privileged” and “superuser” accounts need to stop. This is not good security, this is not zero trust. Either you don’t trust anybody and enforce explicit privilege escalation for specific things, or just accept that you’re using a “super” paradigm and once you’ve got access to that user all bets are off.

    • Kata1yst@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I strongly disagree with your premise. Separating authentication and privilege escalation adds layers of security that are non-trivial and greatly enhance resilience. Many attacks are detected and stopped at privilege escalation, because it happens locally before a user can stop or delete the flow of logs.

      If I get into your non-privileged account I can set up a program that acts like sudo

      No you cannot. A non privileged user doesn’t have the access necessary to run a program that can accomplish this.

      And even if they do it’s too late anyway because I’ve just compromised root and locked everybody out and I’m in there shitting on the filesystems or whatever. Because root can do anything.

      Once again, you didn’t privilege escalate, because once you have a foothold (authentication) you don’t have the necessary privileges, so you must perform reconnaissance to identify an exploitable vector to privilage escalate with. This can be any number of things, but it’s always noisy and slow, usually easy to detect in logs. There is a reason the most sophisticated attacks against well protected targets are “low and slow”.

      And if I can’t break into your non-privileged account then I can’t break into a privileged account either.

      You’re ignoring my points given regarding the risks of compromised keys. If there are no admin keys, there are no remote admin sessions.

      These artificial distinctions between “non-privileged” and “superuser” accounts need to stop. This is not good security, this is not zero trust. Either you don’t trust anybody and enforce explicit privilege escalation for specific things, or just accept that you’re using a “super” paradigm and once you’ve got access to that user all bets are off.

      Spoken like someone who has never red teamed or purple teamed. Even admin accounts are untrusted, given only privileges specific to their role, and closely monitored. That doesn’t mean they should have valid security measures thrown away.

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        A non privileged user doesn’t have the access necessary to run a program that can accomplish this.

        It would be a script called “sudo” somewhere in your PATH. You type sudo, you give it your password, done.

        • Kata1yst@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          That’s called ‘privilege escalation’, and replacing system level calls with user level calls is closely watched for and guarded against with many different security measures including SELinux.

          You’ve already outed yourself multiple times in this thread as someone who doesn’t understand how security in the real world works. Take the L and try to learn from this. It’s okay not to understand something. But it’s very important to recognize when that happens and not claim to understand better than someone else.