Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 18:05:20 +0200 From: Marcus Meissner <meissner@...e.de> To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com Subject: 184.108.40.206 security fixes, please assign CVE id http://lwn.net/Articles/288473/ > Stable kernel 220.127.116.11 > Posted Jul 3, 2008 15:34 UTC (Thu) by PaXTeam (subscriber, #24616) [Link] > ..and once again, users get the usual treatment of not actually being told why an upgrade is > so strongly encouraged. it seems that in this episode of the -stable security fix coverup > series (that's not to say that the corresponding vanilla commits got a better treatment), we > got at least two fine examples of how such bugs should not fall victim of the kernel devs' > full disclosure policy. > > as for the particular bugs: > > 1. > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.25.y.git;a=commitdiff;h=2a739dd53ad7ee010ae6e155438507f329dce788 > adds several checks against NULL function pointers, which is an immediate 'get direct ring-0 > code execution' flag, unfortunately we don't learn whether this is actually possible or not, > but one assumes the STRONGLY encouraged upgrade wasn't for nothing at least. This is CVE-2008-2812. > 2. > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.25.y.git;a=commitdiff;h=1e9a615bfce7996ea4d815d45d364b47ac6a74e8 > is an even better one, it allows one to overflow the task struct refcount (a 32 bit atomic_t > on the affected amd64) and cause its subsequent freeing with dangling references to it all > over the place (including 'current' of the ptraced task itself). corresponding exploit avenues > abound. I don't know if this one has a CVE yet. > Greg, instead of witchhunting on vendor-sec you guys should sit down and decide what you want > for your disclosure policy for real. the next Kernel Summit would be a good opportunity i > think. [no comment] Ciao, Marcus -- Working, but not speaking, for the following german company: SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)
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.