[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 21:00:47 +0200
From: Marcus Meissner <meissner@...e.de>
To: Steve Dickson <SteveD@...hat.com>
Cc: cve-assign@...re.org, oss-security@...ts.openwall.com,
Olaf Kirch <okir@...e.de>
Subject: Re: CVE Request: remote triggerable use-after-free in rpcbind
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 02:58:11PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
>
>
> On 09/17/2015 02:54 PM, Marcus Meissner wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 02:51:26PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 09/17/2015 12:20 PM, cve-assign@...re.org wrote:
> >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >>> Hash: SHA256
> >>>
> >>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg53045.html
> >>>> https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=946204
> >>>
> >>>> frees the netbuf caller_addr and caller_addr.buf. However, it does not
> >>>> clear xp_rtaddr, so xp_rtaddr.buf now refers to memory region A, which
> >>>> is free.
> >>>>
> >>>> ... It will reuse the buffer inside xp_rtaddr
> >>>
> >>> Use CVE-2015-7236.
> >> Will there be a bz opened up?
> >
> > Where should I open it? kernel.org?
> IDK... Aren't CVE suppose to be keep under wrap until
> they are fixed... I know there are some rules around CVEs...
Security issues can be either predisclosed in a smaller circle (the term
is "responsible disclosure"), or published directly.
As Olaf mailed the issue to the linux-nfs list a while ago, and SUSE evaluated
and found the security impact only afterwards, the issue is considered already
"public" and so gets no embargo.
If the impact would be more obvious before it might have get a predisclosure.
There are no strict rules though, just common understanding.
Ciao, Marcus
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.
