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

Re: vulnerable libgit2 in unstable



Hi,

On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 02:51:34AM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Hey there.
> 
> I've just noted that:
> 
> https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/libgit2
> 
> lists CVE-2024-24577 as fixed for unstable (and CVE-2024-24575 is only
> listed in the resolved list).
> 
> However, there still *is* a:
> $ apt-cache policy libgit2-1.5
> libgit2-1.5:
>   Installed: 1.5.1+ds-1
>   Candidate: 1.5.1+ds-1
>   Version table:
>  *** 1.5.1+ds-1 500
>         500 http://deb.debian.org/debian unstable/main amd64 Packages
>         100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> 
> in unstable, in addition to:
> $ apt-cache policy libgit2-1.7
> libgit2-1.7:
>   Installed: 1.7.2+ds-1
>   Candidate: 1.7.2+ds-1
>   Version table:
>  *** 1.7.2+ds-1 500
>         500 http://deb.debian.org/debian unstable/main amd64 Packages
>         100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> 
> And the version 1.5.1+ds-1 seems unfixed as far as I can tell from the
> changelog.

This is because libgit2-1.5 cannot be removed from unstable since
ripasso-cursive (rust-ripasso-cursive needs to be rebuild, so to pick
the new libgit2 built binary package):

| $ dak rm --suite=unstable -n -R -b libgit2-1.5
| Will remove the following packages from unstable:
| 
| libgit2-1.5 | 1.5.1+ds-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips64el, ppc64el, riscv64, s390x
| 
| Maintainer: Utkarsh Gupta <utkarsh@debian.org>
| 
| ------------------- Reason -------------------
| 
| ----------------------------------------------
| 
| Checking reverse dependencies...
| # Broken Depends:
| rust-ripasso-cursive: ripasso-cursive
| 
| Dependency problem found.

Unfortunately that cannot be rsolved (which would be rebuild against
the new libgit2 so that the archive software can decruft the old
version), since #1056253 exists, and rust-ripasso-cursive FTBFS.

The issue is fixed in the source package, and that is what is of
interest for the security-tracker.

Regards,
Salvatore


Reply to: