> On 20 Oct 2021, at 07:40, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At Tue, 19 Oct 2021 02:44:03 -0700, Anders Kaseorg <andersk@mit.edu> wrote in
>> On 10/19/21 01:34, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>>> I tend to agree to this, but seeing ssh ignoring $HOME, I'm not sure
>>> it's safe that we follow the variable at least when accessing
>>> confidentiality(?) files. Since I don't understand the exact
>>> reasoning for the ssh's behavior so it's just my humbole opinion.
>>
>> According to https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3048#c1, it
>> used to be supported to install the ssh binary as setuid. A
>> setuid/setgid binary needs to treat all environment variables with
>> suspicion: if it can be convinced to write a file to $HOME with root
>> privileges, then a user who modifies $HOME before invoking the binary
>> could cause it to write to a file that the user normally couldn’t.
>>
>> There’s no such concern for a binary that isn’t setuid/setgid. Anyone
>> with the ability to modify $HOME can be assumed to already have full
>> control of the user account.
>
> Thansk for the link. Still I'm not sure it's the fact but it sounds
> reasonable enough. If that's the case, I vote +1 for psql or other
> commands honoring $HOME.
Is the proposed change portable across all linux/unix systems we support?
Reading aobut indicates that it's likely to be, but neither NetBSD nor FreeBSD
have the upthread referenced wording in their manpages.
--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/