|
|
|
|
|
|
by russjones
2660 days ago
|
|
|
Maybe I did not provide the best example, but the point I was driving at is that the restrictions here are at the application level and not at the system level. If you take the approach you are taking, similar to ForceCommand, you have to make sure none of the commands in your PATH allow code execution. For example git, vim, less, awk, and find, all of which I use on a daily basis, can all be used to re-launch a restriction free bash. Once you remove all the commands you have to, how much of a shell do you have left? |
|
|
Your point is well-taken!
I'm obviously not privy the the conversations you've had with potential customers, so I'm not entirely sure what they're asking for. But (IMO) the way to think of a restricted shell is to think of it as a shell that can't do anything, except for a small list of narrowly defined tasks. Thinking of it as a normal full shell, with "unsafe" things disabled, that's a losing game, as you note.