Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 05:13:08 +0000
From: "Christey, Steven M." <coley@...re.org>
To: Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com>, "oss-security@...ts.openwall.com"
	<oss-security@...ts.openwall.com>
CC: Assign a CVE Identifier <cve-assign@...re.org>
Subject: RE: heap overflow in procmail

Kurt,

>So this is potentially a very bad issue, so I'm assigning a CVE, sorry
>Mitre (safe assumption: they're all tucked away in bed like normal sane
>people =).

That's actually an unsafe assumption, which has introduced a vulnerability into your logic.  There are counter-examples by two different CVE CNA team members in this thread alone.

For additional evidence that counters your assumption, here are a handful of recent oss-security posts by cve-assign between midnight (Eastern time) and 4 AM.  This list is far from complete.
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/09/02/1
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/08/13/3
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/08/13/4
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/08/13/5
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/08/14/2
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/08/14/5
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/08/15/3

When an issue has been made widely public to the security industry, CNAs are expected to attempt to coordinate more closely with MITRE before assigning a CVE ID themselves.  This helps to reduce confusion and duplicates.  Anything posted to oss-security is considered "widely public."

- Steve

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