Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 21:42:39 +0100
From: Tomas Hoger <thoger@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: agomez@...idsignal.com, Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com>,
        "Steven M.
 Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: Re: TORCS 1.3.2 xml buffer overflow -
 CVE-2012-1189

On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 09:31:10 -0500 Andres Gomez wrote:

> 2012/3/5 Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com>
> 
> > Would you consider tham to be the same code base or a different code
> > base? If the same code base, share the CVE, if different code
> > bases, new CVE for it. Steve: do we have a policy for "Fresh" forks
> > as it were?
>
> Well, Speed Dreams started with TORCS code base, but they have added
> a lot new code, so I would say that right now they have different
> code base, although they still share a big portion of the code (as
> the vulnerable section).  Because of that I would consider It needs a
> new CVE number, could you assign one to it?  :)

Their code bases may differ significantly in other parts, but it seems
the affected vulnerable code is still identical between the two.
Following are versions shortly before fixes got committed:

http://torcs.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/torcs/torcs/torcs/src/modules/graphic/ssggraph/grsound.cpp?revision=1.31.2.2&view=markup
http://speed-dreams.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/speed-dreams/trunk/src/modules/graphic/ssggraph/grsound.cpp?revision=4146&view=markup

In cases like this, same CVE is used for all project that use / embed
the same affected code.

-- 
Tomas Hoger / Red Hat Security Response Team

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ