[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OpenSSL 0.9.8 patches



Right, but what about the patch for adding TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV? And the
other vulnerabilities that were patched in 0.9.8zc?


*****************
Changes between 0.9.8zb and 0.9.8zc [15 Oct 2014]

  *) Session Ticket Memory Leak.

     When an OpenSSL SSL/TLS/DTLS server receives a session ticket the
     integrity of that ticket is first verified. In the event of a session
     ticket integrity check failing, OpenSSL will fail to free memory
     causing a memory leak. By sending a large number of invalid session
     tickets an attacker could exploit this issue in a Denial Of Service
     attack.
     (CVE-2014-3567)
     [Steve Henson]

  *) Build option no-ssl3 is incomplete.

     When OpenSSL is configured with "no-ssl3" as a build option, servers
     could accept and complete a SSL 3.0 handshake, and clients could be
     configured to send them.
     (CVE-2014-3568)
     [Akamai and the OpenSSL team]

  *) Add support for TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV.
     Client applications doing fallback retries should call
     SSL_set_mode(s, SSL_MODE_SEND_FALLBACK_SCSV).
     (CVE-2014-3566)
     [Adam Langley, Bodo Moeller]

  *) Add additional DigestInfo checks.

     Reencode DigestInto in DER and check against the original when
     verifying RSA signature: this will reject any improperly encoded
     DigestInfo structures.

     Note: this is a precautionary measure and no attacks are currently
known.


On 10/20/2014 01:22 PM, Johnathon Tinsley wrote:
> POODLE is basically un-patchable. Just turn off SSLv3 in any application which requires encryption. 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Allen" <paul@inetz.com>
> To: debian-lts@lists.debian.org
> Sent: Monday, 20 October, 2014 7:51:12 PM
> Subject: OpenSSL 0.9.8 patches
> 
> Will the OpenSSL 0.9.8 package for Squeeze LTS be getting patched with
> the latest security patches for the items such as POODLE? I've seen the
> Wheezy and Sid packages patched, but nothing for Squeeze yet.
> 
> Paul
> 
> 


Reply to: