Re: How to check UID of process on the other side of local TCP/UDP connection

On Friday 24 November 2006 10:11, rainmailbox2001-ola@xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello.

I have the following situation:
- Client communicates with server via TCP or UDP.
- Both client and server are on the same local host.
- Server runs with root privilege.

Now, client connects to server. Server has to check uid of the client. How
it can be done? I need a solution that can be ported to all modern Unix and
Linux systems.

See the getuid(2) and geteuid(3p) man pages. Whatever language you're writing
in probably has the system call.
The most simple solution I came with is as follows:
1. Client connects to server.
2. Server asks client to create file with random name, for example
/tmp/check.6723 3. Client generates the file.
4. Server checks the owner of the file.

That's just *nasty*.
The owner of the file is the UID under which client is running.

But
the problem is that it requires some additional communication between
server and client. My programs can communicate hundreds times a second
so creating, checking and removing the file is a big performance issue.

Yep, you need IPC.
Do you have any ideas how this local authentication can be achieved in some
different way?

You want to use a UID for authentication???
I
was also thinking about using Unix sockets for communication, but it
seems that they also lack any mechanism for authenticating the client.
Anyways, I would prefer to stick with TCP/UDP, because this is what my
programs use already, and I don't really want to change everything to
Unix sockets (unless of course Unix sockets are the only good way to
resolve my problems).

Unix sockets really would make more sense. This is what they're *for*.
Why have another TCP/UDP service, running as root, if there's any way to avoid
it? Even if it's only a localhost listener, it's possibly an easier elevation
of privilege or DoS attack. Using the stack is also more expensive.

Plus, you have socketpair(2) to simplify your coding. A quick Google will give
you the details on that. It should simplify your code, no matter the
language. And you should have an implementation, as it's another system call.

As this is a security list, it's pretty much obligatory for me to always
recommend simplification, if only to maintain the habit. ;)

You have to realize that sockets only provide a means of communication. What
you *do* with your communications link, whether that be authentication or
streaming the digits of pi, is up to you, and has to be coded.

Thanks,
Ola

Have fun,

Greg Metcalfe

Relevant Pages

  • RE: MessageSecurityException when consuming WCF service
    ... a WCF based client server communication application, ... Microsoft MSDN Online Support Lead ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: What doesnt lend itself to OO?
    ... >> proxy and instructs the server to constuct the real object. ... rather than client code. ... If 'clock' is instantiated in the server, ... > for the server interface at the OOA level. ...
    (comp.object)
  • This is going straight to the pool room
    ... or not the client has privilege to do what they're trying to do, ... The server environment is this: ... 3GL User action Routines that Tier3 will execute on your behalf during the ... Routine Name: USER_INIT ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • [Full-Disclosure] R: Full-Disclosure Digest, Vol 3, Issue 42
    ... Full-Disclosure Digest, Vol 3, Issue 42 ... SD Server 4.0.70 Directory Traversal Bug ... Arkeia Network Backup Client Remote Access ...
    (Full-Disclosure)
  • Re: What doesnt lend itself to OO?
    ... > rather than client code. ... no way to do that without also touching the object with clock semantics ... will not encapsulate both clock semantics and network semantics. ... The server can do whatever it wants ...
    (comp.object)