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

Bug#684763: pu: package tor/0.2.2.38-1



On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 18:01 +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> | Changes in version 0.2.2.38 - 2012-08-12
> |   Tor 0.2.2.38 fixes a rare race condition that can crash exit relays;
> |   fixes a remotely triggerable crash bug; and fixes a timing attack that
> |   could in theory leak path information.
> | 
> |   o Security fixes:
> |     - Avoid read-from-freed-memory and double-free bugs that could occur
> |       when a DNS request fails while launching it. Fixes bug 6480;
> |       bugfix on 0.2.0.1-alpha.
> |     - Avoid an uninitialized memory read when reading a vote or consensus
> |       document that has an unrecognized flavor name. This read could
> |       lead to a remote crash bug. Fixes bug 6530; bugfix on 0.2.2.6-alpha.
> |     - Try to leak less information about what relays a client is
> |       choosing to a side-channel attacker. Previously, a Tor client would
> |       stop iterating through the list of available relays as soon as it
> |       had chosen one, thus finishing a little earlier when it picked
> |       a router earlier in the list. If an attacker can recover this
> |       timing information (nontrivial but not proven to be impossible),
> |       they could learn some coarse-grained information about which relays
> |       a client was picking (middle nodes in particular are likelier to
> |       be affected than exits). The timing attack might be mitigated by
> |       other factors (see bug 6537 for some discussion), but it's best
> |       not to take chances. Fixes bug 6537; bugfix on 0.0.8rc1.
> 
> [ https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/blob/release-0.2.2:/ReleaseNotes ]
> 
> 
> I would like to package this new version as 0.2.2.38-1, and upload it to
> squeeze so that we can get these issues fixed in Debian.

Apologies for not spotting earlier that there wasn't one attached, but
please could we have a debdiff against the package currently in p-u?

Regards,

Adam


Reply to: