Improper Access Control Affecting sudo-devel package, versions *


Severity

Recommended
medium

Based on CentOS security rating.

Threat Intelligence

EPSS
3.17% (88th percentile)

Do your applications use this vulnerable package?

In a few clicks we can analyze your entire application and see what components are vulnerable in your application, and suggest you quick fixes.

Test your applications
  • Snyk IDSNYK-CENTOS6-SUDODEVEL-2006819
  • published26 Jul 2021
  • disclosed19 Dec 2019

Introduced: 19 Dec 2019

CVE-2019-19234  (opens in a new tab)
CWE-284  (opens in a new tab)

How to fix?

There is no fixed version for Centos:6 sudo-devel.

NVD Description

Note: Versions mentioned in the description apply only to the upstream sudo-devel package and not the sudo-devel package as distributed by Centos. See How to fix? for Centos:6 relevant fixed versions and status.

In Sudo through 1.8.29, the fact that a user has been blocked (e.g., by using the ! character in the shadow file instead of a password hash) is not considered, allowing an attacker (who has access to a Runas ALL sudoer account) to impersonate any blocked user. NOTE: The software maintainer believes that this CVE is not valid. Disabling local password authentication for a user is not the same as disabling all access to that user--the user may still be able to login via other means (ssh key, kerberos, etc). Both the Linux shadow(5) and passwd(1) manuals are clear on this. Indeed it is a valid use case to have local accounts that are only accessible via sudo and that cannot be logged into with a password. Sudo 1.8.30 added an optional setting to check the shell of the target user (not the encrypted password!) against the contents of /etc/shells but that is not the same thing as preventing access to users with an invalid password hash

References

CVSS Base Scores

version 3.1