Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
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

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