Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:41:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Steven M. Christey" <>
Subject: Re:  Re: CVE id request: php5

That was me.  This basically came through a separate effort to catch up on
a backlog of CVEs from 2008, and I forgot about this discussion (that was
literally 3,700 CVEs ago).  There is a disclaimer in the CVE desc that
says how limited the scope is.  It's definitely on the edge of inclusion

- Steve

On Thu, 27 Aug 2009, Tomas Hoger wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:20:14 -0500 (EST) "Steven M. Christey"
> <> wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Jan 2009, Joe Orton wrote:
> >
> > > If the script is taking untrusted input data and passing it
> > > unsanitized as the "key" argument to a dba_replace() call, it can
> > > override arbitrary keys in the ini file anyway.  Truncating the ini
> > > file to zero length seems like a less severe problem than being
> > > able to write (arbitrary?) data to arbitrary keys.
> >
> > We don't have any formal criteria for this kind of thing, but in
> > general, we ask whether there are realistic scenarios under which an
> > attack can succeed, and if any additional privileges are gained
> > versus normal methods.  These questions are particularly applicable
> > to language interpreters and compilers.  Given this scenario, it
> > seems unrealistic that an app would perform a dba_replace() with
> > user-controlled input - and if it does, then it's a vuln in the
> > application, not PHP itself.  So it doesn't seem to require a CVE.
> Just for posterity, this got CVE-2008-7068 after all.
> --
> Tomas Hoger / Red Hat Security Response Team

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.