Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 14:30:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
cc: coley@...re.org
Subject: Re: CVE request: Contenido < 4.8.7, < 4.6.24


On Sat, 2 Aug 2008, Hanno [utf-8] Böck wrote:

> Changelog in 4.8 is missing, changelog in 4.6.24 states:
> "- Bugfixes / Hotfixes zu u.a. CON-148, CON-150, CON-152
> - diverse Hotfixes fuer potentielle Luecken"
> (bugfixes/hotfixes for CON-148, CON-150, CON-152 and others, several hotfixes
> for potential vulnerabilities)
>
> I think CON-xxx is some kind of internal advisory numbering, but I found
> nowhere what CON-xxx is.

I downloaded 4.8.7 and looked at the changelog, which says:

  [CON-XXX] - Some XSS/RFI Bugfixes

The XSS and RFI lines up with a MILW0RM:5810 post on June 14, which
produced CVE-2008-2912 for the RFI and CVE-2008-2911 for the XSS.

HOWEVER, that might be just a coincidence.  Contenido 4.8.6 says
"[CON-XXX] - Additional hot- and bugfixes added" and SECUNIA:30683 (which
is associated with those two CVEs) says "upgrade to 4.8.6" - so according
to Secunia, those two CVEs were fixed in 4.8.6, *NOT* 4.8.7.

Then, release 4.8.5 says "[CON-152] - Security fixes in cronjobs" and
"[CON-150] - Security fixes".  CVE-2008-2912 covers a lot of RFI issues in
cronjobs, but it also covers some others.

Release 4.8.5 also alludes to deprecating some tool scripts because they
are "evil in productive environments" which sounds like security but
doesn't even actually say so.

There are also older Contenido CVE's that we haven't recorded vendor fixes
for, so maybe Contenido is catching up... or maybe they're getting
proactive and fixing new things.

Any thoughts?  Typical CVE practice would be to split all these up based
on affected version and allude to potential fixes for the existing CVEs,
but that doesn't quite seem appropriate here.

- Steve

Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.

Hosted by DataForce ISP - Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux