Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2014 04:06:12 -0400 From: John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com> To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: CVE-2014-4699: Linux ptrace bug On 07/05/2014 08:37 PM, Marc Deslauriers wrote: > On 14-07-05 05:22 PM, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: >> On sam., 2014-07-05 at 22:25 +0400, Solar Designer wrote: >>> Here are some distro vendor status pages on this bug: >>> >>> "x86_64,ptrace: Enforce RIP <= TASK_SIZE_MAX (CVE-2014-4699)" >>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1337339 >>> >>> Ubuntu has just sent out 7 update announcements (for different of >>> their >>> supported distros/kernels), USN-2266-1 through USN-2272-1. >>> >>> "ptrace,x86: force IRET path after a ptrace_stop()" >>> http://kernel.opensuse.org/cgit/kernel/commit/?h=openSUSE-13.1&id=d1f26676dad578a65c94782f0c2bd00b7aa68f1b >>> >>> "CVE-2014-4699 Kernel: x86_64,ptrace: Enforce RIP <= TASK_SIZE_MAX" >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1115927 >> >> Hmhm, what are the reasons why the mainline (and opensuse) fix >> (b9cd18de4db3c9ffa7e17b0dc0ca99ed5aa4d43a) is to force using IRET >> instead of SYSRET, while distros like Ubuntu and Redhat seem to “only” >> make sure RIP is canonical? >> >> Regards, >> > > AFAIK, our plan is to switch to the upstream fix for the next kernel updates. > yep, Ubuntu went with the original patch, as we where mostly through our process when b9cd18de4db3c9ffa7e17b0dc0ca99ed5aa4d43a hit. We decided to do a release with the original patch so we could get something out this weekend, but will switch to b9cd18de4db3c9ffa7e17b0dc0ca99ed5aa4d43a asap
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