Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 02:12:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: cve-assign@...re.org
To: larry0@...com
Cc: cve-assign@...re.org, oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem kompanee-recipes-0.1.4

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

> is it possible that this Gem wasn't ever intended to be used in the
> context of a Rails application?

We haven't seen any response to this yet. (At least from our
perspective, this is completely fine -- sending a message here
containing "CVE:Please Assign" doesn't mean that the person is
required to respond to questions from us.)

Just to clarify: we are aware of the full set of messages:

  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem codders-dataset-1.3.2.1
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem cap-strap-0.1.5
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem codders-dataset-1.3.2.1
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem backup-agoddard-3.0.28
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem backup_checksum-3.0.23
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem gyazo-1.0.0
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem VladTheEnterprising-0.2
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem gnms-2.1.1
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem point-cli-0.0.1
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem kompanee-recipes-0.1.4
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem lean-ruport-0.3.8
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem kajam-1.0.3.rc2
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem lawn-login-0.0.7
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem kcapifony-2.1.6
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem karo-2.3.8
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem lynx-0.2.0
  Vulnerability Report for Ruby Gem ciborg-3.0.0
  Vulnerabilities in Ruby Gem brbackup-0.1.1

and we have not yet assigned any CVE IDs. What we think might be the
best option is to disregard any vulnerability-related observations
that are qualified with a phrase such as "if this gem is used in the
context of a rails application." As far as we know, existence of a Gem
only implies a choice of a packaging mechanism for a piece of Ruby
code. Existence of a Gem doesn't, as far as we know, imply that the
author is claiming that the code will operate safely in cases where
its input arrives from an untrusted source in a way that crosses
privilege boundaries. This option would result in approximately 20
CVEs for other types of issues such as:

  - "expose the password to the process table" (e.g., an attacker can
     obtain sensitive information by running the ps program at the
     right time)

  - symlink attacks

but no CVEs for issues involving shell metacharacters in variable
names. The shell-metacharacter CVE IDs could be assigned later if
anyone identifies a product that actually uses one of the applicable
Gems unsafely within a Rails application.

- -- 
CVE assignment team, MITRE CVE Numbering Authority
M/S M300
202 Burlington Road, Bedford, MA 01730 USA
[ PGP key available through http://cve.mitre.org/cve/request_id.html ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (SunOS)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTxhclAAoJEKllVAevmvmscfgH/0QiThSi/wjrMepw3hpuFF/K
8+2nHFlPfVEt3AIoATECqshGYIbft3JDMsFgi545jdQ2uzVsETABA+IyhYAoqwmD
twRLhcCOzQVs9KP4/omdKlOV33m4Xf/blRqSUD6luDSJDdvQtSeQZGDwvkPGmqzb
eO4JoeF19MZhF5jnDt8F5mukf0TbW4859GtFbEd3jU7dYMEMWCL0UCy71SU/rfoU
cEuNPp83O1EIJ8bcTS9tz8nILrMEf7n6zbJmtM3cdyD0pHxaiei9gdWZ74XWALcp
AAsn+SHOSsffZ5htsFJZSqlsyD2dTm3zaEdhzAKn9lqZuPQE0TJ2/5AtNsI0/m8=
=3GVP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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