Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 08:49:55 -0300 From: Gustavo Grieco <gustavo.grieco@...il.com> To: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@...ian.org> Cc: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: CVE-2016-9584: heap use-after-free on libical 2017-01-27 8:21 GMT-03:00 Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@...ian.org>: > On Fri, 20 Jan 2017, Gustavo Grieco wrote: >> > Any reason why you did not request a CVE for #251? >> >> Yes. It was already reported here: >> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1275400 (CVE-2016-5824) >> but it was never officially reported upstream (and therefore, never fixed). > > It was reported in https://github.com/libical/libical/issues/235 but then > closed by the submitter. > > You could have stated in #251 that you believed this crash to be the same > than the one above. It was not obvious to me, I did it for you. Thanks! > >> >> It is worth to mention there is a very similar bug found (CVE-2016-5824) on >> >> the libical version used by >> >> Thunderbird but we think is *not* the same as this one. In fact, we've >> >> tested it on Thunderbird and it does *not* crash. >> >> >> >> The reproducer is available upon request. >> > >> > #253 has a reproducer here: >> > https://github.com/libical/libical/files/627392/heap-use-after-free.ical.txt >> > >> > Is this the same file? >> >> It is not the same file in fact. We found a variation of the original >> input that trigger this >> read out-of-bounds to read more than 60 bytes. This looks more serious >> than usual (maybe you can read as much as you want) . >> We had some complains in the past for making public test cases .. > > Here, I'm lost. You said that this oss-security report (CVE-2016-9584) is > the same as #253 but you have another file than the test case > submitted in #253. > > Are you sure that this second file is the same underlying issue ? We only submitted the test case in #253: it was smaller and harmless. We sent the other file privately to the security teams of some Linux distributions. Both aborts/crashes have a very similar backtraces so we think they are the same issue. We are using ASAN to test so we are quite sure that there is no previous unsafe memory use before the ones reported here. Nevertheless, ASAN is not perfect and we are not the developers of libical so cannot be 100% sure. > >> > If it's a different file, then I'd like to have access to the file but I >> > would prefer if it was just available publicly and not to me only. >> >> Feel free to make the file public if you want. > > You would have to send it to me first :-) Ups, i sent it to a different Raphael (also from Debian). This time I won't miss.. > > Cheers, > -- > Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer > > Support Debian LTS: https://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html > Learn to master Debian: https://debian-handbook.info/get/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.
Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ