[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 14:41:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Josh Bressers <bressers@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: CVE Request -- Transmission v1.92
----- "Jan Lieskovsky" <jlieskov@...hat.com> wrote:
> Hi Steve, vendors,
>
> Transmission upstream has recently released latest, v1.92 version:
> [1] http://trac.transmissionbt.com/wiki/Changes
>
> fixing one (potentially two) security issues:
> a, Fix potential buffer overflow when adding maliciously-crafted
> magnet links
>
> References:
> [2] http://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/2965
> [3] http://trac.transmissionbt.com/wiki/Changes
> [4] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=309831
Use CVE-2010-0748 for this one. I'm calling it an arbitrary memory write.
It's not really a buffer overflow.
>
> --
>
> b, Fix possible data corruption issue caused by data sent by bad
> peers during endgame (this one I am not completely sure of, but when
> looking at the relevant bug record:
> [5] http://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/1242
> there is written:
> [6] http://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/1242#comment:1
> "My theory is that for some reason Transmission will download a
> corrupt part from someone but not realize it until you do a
> manual verify. At this point T will recognize the bad part and
> redownload it from the same person, which just causes the
> problem again."
>
> so to prevent someone from successfully downloading content of
> some torrent file, for an attacker to should be enough to
> download a part of it, corrupt it and
> share it. Not sure about the algorithm, Transmission decides
> which torrent
> to retrieve content from, but if it is deterministic /
> predictable behavior / algorithm, such attack could succeed).
>
> References:
> [7] http://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/1242
> [8] http://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/1242#comment:1
> [9] http://trac.transmissionbt.com/wiki/Changes
>
I'm giving this issue a CVE ID too. I think this issue is a bit on the
fence, but given a malicious client could corrupt download data in a manner
that is hard to fix, it should get one.
Use CVE-2010-0749
Thanks.
--
JB
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.
