←back to thread

414 points st_goliath | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.525s | source
Show context
RMPR ◴[] No.43971862[source]
Nice write-up.

> Screen offers a multi-user mode which allows to attach to Screen sessions owned by other users in the system (given the proper credentials). These multi-user features are only available when Screen is installed with the setuid-root bit set. This configuration of Screen results in highly increased attack surface, because of the complex Screen code that runs with root privileges in this case

I wasn't aware of such a feature but I guess it's what makes stuff like tmate possible. Speaking of which, I wonder if tmux is affected by the same kind of vulnerability.

replies(4): >>43971918 #>>43971987 #>>43973735 #>>43977030 #
dooglius ◴[] No.43971987[source]
No, tmux uses unix domain sockets. I have no idea why screen chose to take the setuid approach instead here; it seems totally unnecessary to have root privileges.

EDIT: Further down, TFA gives a plausible explanation: the current screen devs are not fully familiar with the code base. If so, the setuid-root approach was probably the easiest way to make the feature work in lieu of such familiarity.

replies(5): >>43972036 #>>43972445 #>>43972504 #>>43973108 #>>43975717 #
JdeBP ◴[] No.43972036[source]
screen has a lot of architectural baggage that can be traced back to its initial 1987 comp.sources.unix/mod.sources versions in some cases. Being set-UID to the superuser is one of them. See the doco for screen as it was posted in volume 10:

https://sources.vsta.org/comp.sources.unix/volume10/screen/

replies(2): >>43972131 #>>43979137 #
ngangaga[dead post] ◴[] No.43972131[source]
[flagged]
entropie ◴[] No.43972586[source]
For me it felt (!) like screen is pretty much obsolute since 10+ years. When tmux came I switched and never looked back and I know a few that handled it the same.
replies(4): >>43972845 #>>43973094 #>>43973786 #>>43979384 #
dbdoskey ◴[] No.43973786[source]
A similar process is happening with zellij and tmux. Since I switched over I feel that tmux is obsolete.
replies(3): >>43973811 #>>43974148 #>>43974216 #
1. pabs3 ◴[] No.43974216[source]
Terminals are obsoleted by Arcan:

https://arcan-fe.com/2025/01/27/sunsetting-cursed-terminal-e...

replies(2): >>43975004 #>>43975185 #
2. skydhash ◴[] No.43975004[source]
From a quick read, all I can see is a manifesto for emacs.
3. procaryote ◴[] No.43975185[source]
How though? Genuine question; x11 didn't obsolete terminals. Does Arcan do something X11 couldn't?