Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 16:14:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
cc: "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>,
        Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@...hat.com>,
        Jindrich Novy <jnovy@...hat.com>, Florian Festi <ffesti@...hat.com>,
        Matt McCutchen <matt@...tmccutchen.net>
Subject: Re: CVE Request -- rpm -- Fails to remove the SUID/SGID
 bits on package upgrade (RH BZ#598775)


On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Josh Bressers wrote:

> I'm going to give both of these the same CVE id. The issues are very
> related, and I had look at the CWE guide, they both seem to fall under
> "CWE-281: Improper Preservation of Permissions"
>
> Steve, feel free to overrule me on this one.

At a low level of granularity, it can be overkill to distinguish between 
closely-related flaw types.

The factor of concern here is that Red Hat bug 598775 suggests that the 
first variant was committed to a changeset, but not the second.  I can't 
(quickly) assess whether upstream committed changes for both variants, but 
if there's only a commit for the first one (and a public release), then 
maybe we consider these bugs as "almost-but-not-quite the same version" 
and assign a separate CVE.

We also use time lag between disclosures as a splitter, but these were 
more-or-less within a 24-hour period, which we typically treat as "same 
day."

This is fuzzy on both vuln type and version... I defer to others who can 
shed more insight on the question of whether these versions are different 
enough.

- Steve

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

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.