Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 22:44:14 +0200
From: Moritz Muehlenhoff <jmm@...ian.org>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Kurt Seifried <kurt@...fried.org>
Subject: Re: Bugzilla 3.7.1 CVE request

Reed Loden wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 00:51:40 -0600
> Kurt Seifried <kurt@...fried.org> wrote:
> 
> > CVE # for this please.
> > 
> > http://www.bugzilla.org/security/3.7.1/
> 
> This security issue only affects the 3.7 and 3.7.1 development
> "snapshots" (basically, alpha/beta quality). It's highly unlikely that
> any distro would be tracking this unstable version/branch, so is a CVE
> really required? If so, Mozilla can assign one from its pool.
> 
> I usually deal with getting CVEs assigned for Bugzilla issues, and I
> just didn't think this one required one... However, maybe I was
> mistaken in that.

I don't think that development snapshots needs a CVE ID, but there's 
at least one more Bugzilla vulnerability fixed in a release which hasn't 
been assigned a CVE ID so far:

http://www.bugzilla.org/security/3.2.3/
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=495257

Cheers,
        Moritz

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.