Isn't it weird that we put credentials in the environment? - eviltoast

Almost every program that we run has access to the environment, so nothing stops them from curling our credentials to some nefarious server.

Why don’t we put credentials in files and then pass them to the programs that need them? Maybe coupled with some mechanism that prevents executables from reading any random file except those approved.

    • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
      371·
      1 year ago

      I am not familiar with the software bubblewrap so I am just picturing your hard drives wrapped up inside your case.

    • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
      21·
      1 year ago

      The environment of other processes is readable in procfs.

      /proc/PID/environ

      Thanks to the permissions it’s read-only, and only by the user with which the process runs, but it’s still bad, I think

      • Lojcs@lemm.ee
        7·
        1 year ago

        Don’t all programs run as the user anyways? That changes nothing on a single user machine

            • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
              3·
              1 year ago

              You don’t login as service users, they’re just a means of taking advantage of the user separation features. They have the login shell set to /bin/false typically.

                • russjr08@outpost.zeuslink.netEnglish
                  3·
                  1 year ago

                  From a quick search I’ve just done, the major difference is that /bin/false can’t return any text, the only thing it can do as specified via POSIX standards is return false.

                  So if you set someone’s shell to /bin/nologin there can be some text that says “You’re not allowed shell access”, similar to what happens if you try to SSH into say GitHub.

                  Of course, for a service account that won’t be operated by a person, that doesn’t matter - so whichever one you use is just whichever the operator thought of first, most likely.