Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 17:09:51 -0700
From: Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
CC: Jan Lieskovsky <jlieskov@...hat.com>, Josselin Mouette <joss@...ian.org>
Subject: Re: CVE request: Transmission can be made to crash
 remotely

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/11/2013 06:47 AM, Jan Lieskovsky wrote:
> Hello Yves-Alexis,
> 
> to follow up on this one. The source of the issue seems to be
> underlying libutp code: [1]
> https://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/5002#comment:22
> 
> more specifically the way how libutp (previously) handled selective
> acknowledgements, which resulted in following two (libutp)
> patches: [2] https://github.com/bittorrent/libutp/issues/38 [3]
> https://github.com/bittorrent/libutp/issues/37
> 
> Transmission upstream corrected this issue in v2.74: [4]
> https://trac.transmissionbt.com/query?milestone=2.74&group=component&order=severity
>
>  with the following patch: [5]
> https://trac.transmissionbt.com/changeset/13646
> 
> Ad assigning CVE ids - I think one CVE id is enough. The problem is
> in libutp code, and Transmission upstream seems to commit their own
> change only due to libutp (un)responsiveness: [6]
> https://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/5002#comment:32
> 
> Thank you && Regards, Jan. -- Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat
> Security Response Team
> 
> P.S.: All the links from above at one place are at: [7]
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=909934
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- On dim., 2013-02-10 at 11:50 +0100,
> Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Package: transmission-daemon Version: 2.52-3 Severity: grave 
>> Tags: security patch upstream Justification: user security hole
>> 
>> The transmission-daemon package in wheezy crashes regularly.
>> According to upstream this is a remote security hole (at least a
>> remote DoS, but most probably there is a way to take control of
>> the process).
>> 
>> https://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/5044 
>> https://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/5002
>> 
>> Apparently there is no CVE assigned. The bug is fixed upstream
>> and I’m attaching the patch. I’m currently testing a patched
>> package, and will report whether the fix is sufficient.
>> 
>> Could a CVE be assigned for this?
>> 
>> Thanks in advance, -- Yves-Alexis

Please use CVE-2012-6129  for this issue.

- -- 
Kurt Seifried Red Hat Security Response Team (SRT)
PGP: 0x5E267993 A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
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=ZqrS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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