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

Re: upload leptonlib



On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 14:36 -0500, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> On 2018-02-15 21:34:48, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-02-14 at 22:23 -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 02:56:24PM +0530, Abhijith PA wrote:
> > > > Hello.
> > > > 
> > > > I prepared LTS security update for leptonlib. Please review and upload.
> > > > You can find debdiff along with the mail.
> > > > link:
> > > > https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/leptonlib/leptonlib_1.69-3.1+deb7u1.dsc
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Abhijith,
> > > 
> > > I have reviewed and uploaded the package. While you backported the
> > > upstream fix, I feel like their approach falls under item #2 of "The Six
> > > Dumbest Ideas in Computer Security [0]": Enumerating Badness. I cannot
> > > help but wonder if another vulnerability will be uncovered later that
> > > uses different characters that are not being checked.
> > 
> > I found one already: it filters out `command` but not $(command).
> > 
> > I'm afraid this library appears to have been written without any regard
> > for security, or even the existence of multiuser systems.
> > 
> > Bug #890548 (stack buffer overflows) is probably exploitable in wheezy,
> > and I think there are more instances.
> > 
> > Bug #885704 (hardcoded paths in /tmp) has been closed in unstable but I
> > can still see:
> 
> [...]
> 
> I've re-added the package to dla-needed.txt for #889759 /
> CVE-2018-3836. Should a new CVE be issued for #885704?

I think additional CVEs are needed for:

1. #890548
2. Incomplete fix for #889759 / CVE-2018-3836
3. Similar issue to #889759 / CVE-2018-3836, "/" is not filtered so
there is a possibility of path traversal and arbitrary file overwrite
4. #885704
5. The remaining hardcoded paths in /tmp

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
One of the nice things about standards is that there are so many of
them.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: