[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 22:50:26 +0300
From: Alexander Cherepanov <cherepan@...me.ru>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
CC: cve-assign@...re.org
Subject: Re: CVE request: file(1) DoS
On 2014-12-17 03:44, Alexander Cherepanov wrote:
> There are two more DoSes fixed in ELF parser of file(1), similar to the
> recent CVE-2014-8116.
These fixes were included in 5.22 release:
http://mx.gw.com/pipermail/file/2015/001660.html
> 1. Limit the number of ELF notes processed
> Report: http://mx.gw.com/pipermail/file/2014/001653.html
> Fix: https://github.com/file/file/commit/ce90e05774dd77d86cfc8dfa6da57b32816841c4
This issue seems to be introduced here:
https://github.com/file/file/commit/956a45ab1c54b11304b367056f41905e72a02380#diff-bc5c24ef9f39a5f4963ca28ecbc645b3L423
which ended up in 5.08 release. Hence releases 5.08--5.21 are vulnerable.
> 2. Limit string printing to 100 chars
> Report: http://mx.gw.com/pipermail/file/2014/001654.html
> Fix: https://github.com/file/file/commit/65437cee25199dbd385fb35901bc0011e164276c
This issue was introduced in the following commit:
https://github.com/file/file/commit/c8451af8ab0c2e2a93ce93b9c68257d31576cc85
which ended up in 5.16 release. Hence releases 5.16--5.21 are vulnerable.
> Both problems amplified by the fact that the same section in ELF file
> can be referenced and processed by file(1) multiple times. This is also
> fixed in the first commit linked above.
>
> Could CVE(s) please be assigned?
--
Alexander Cherepanov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
