Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 23:50:44 -0500 From: Raphael Geissert <geissert@...ian.org> To: Tomas Hoger <thoger@...hat.com>, oss-security@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: CVE request: opencryptoki insecure lock files handling On Thursday 20 September 2012 09:10:14 Tomas Hoger wrote: > Ok, so I think we need 1 CVE for the two insecure temporary file uses, > unless we want to split each temporary file issue under a separate > CVE. I don't believe there's a real need to assign CVE for 2.4.1 > (which did not improve things on systems with world writable /var/lock) > or 2.4.2 (which re-opens the attack for pkcs11 group members on systems > with restricted /var/lock, but improves things on systems with world > writable /var/lock). I think two ids is more appropriate given that the issue isn't fixed in 2.4.1 for systems with world writable /var/lock. 2.4.2, on the other hand, covers boths scenarios (given that pkcs11 group membership is already considered root-equivalent.) Regards, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Developer www.debian.org - get.debian.net
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.
Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ