Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:00:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Josh Bressers <>
Cc: "Steven M. Christey" <>
Subject: Re: CVE Request -- perl v5.8.* -- stack overflow by
 processing certain regex (Gentoo BTS#313565 / RH BZ#580605)

As MITRE didn't reply, I'm going to assign CVE-2010-1158 to this to cover Perl.

We can address other things on a case by case basis if needed.



----- "Jan Lieskovsky" <> wrote:

> Hi Steve, vendors,
>    1, wouldn't like to open a can of worms,
>    2, but for purpose of properly tracking it, requesting a CVE id for
> the
>       following Perl regular expression engine issue:
> Bruce Merry reported:
>    [1]
> an integer overflow, leading to stack overflow in the way
> Perl regular expression engine processed certain regular
> expression(s). Remote attacker could use this flaw to cause
> a denial of service (crash of an application, using the
> Perl regular expression engine).
> Public PoC from [1]:
> --------------------
>    perl -e 'if ((("a " x 100000) . "a\n") =~ /\A\S+(?: \S+)*\n\z/)
> {}'
> References:
>    [2]
>    [3]
> Affected Perl versions:
>    Issue tested and confirmed in Perl of versions v5.8.*.
>    Versions of Perl v5.10.* are not affected by this.
> Steve, what's the Mitre's opinion on cases like this --
> denial of service reachable via certain regular expression.
> Should we track them on per issue basis? Or only for cases,
> where more than a DoS is possible? (doesn't seem to be
> this case though).
> Thanks && Regards, Jan.
> --
> Jan iankko Lieskovsky / 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.