Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 10:19:39 -0500 From: Hyrum Wright <hwright@...che.org> To: oss-security <oss-security@...ts.openwall.com> Cc: Kurt Seifried <kurt@...fried.org>, Josh Bressers <bressers@...hat.com>, "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>, Joe Orton <jorton@...hat.com>, Subversion Development <dev@...version.apache.org> Subject: Re: CVE request for subversion On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Jan Lieskovsky <jlieskov@...hat.com> wrote: > Hello Kurt, Josh, vendors, > > Josh Bressers wrote: >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> Unspecified vulnerability in the server component in Apache Subversion >>> 1.6.x before 1.6.15 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of >>> service via unknown vectors, related to a "several bug fixes, >>> including two which can cause client-initiated crashes on the server." >>> >>>  http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2010-11/0475.shtml > > Cc-ed Hyrum to shed more light into this one.  mentions two issues: > <begin quote> > ... > several bug fixes, including two which can cause client-initiated > crashes on the server. > </end quote> > > Further look at: >  http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/tags/1.6.15/CHANGES > > suggest: > > A, "* prevent crash in mod_dav_svn when using SVNParentPath (r1033166)" > being the first one. > Upstream changeset: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1033166 > > and after discussion with Joe Orton, Joe suggested: > > B, * fix server-side memory leaks triggered by 'blame -g' (r1032808) > References: > http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2010-11/0102.shtml > Upstream changeset: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1032808 > > being the second one as denial of service attack (by memory consumption) > against > svnserve. > > Questions: > ---------- > Hyrum, could you confirm A, and B, issues are those two, mentioned in  > to be able to cause client-initiated crashes on the server? I can confirm that A and B are the two issues mentioned in . >> I admit, this isn't obvious, so let's use CVE-2010-4539 for now. >> We can split it if needed once more information is known. > > Josh, since CVE-2010-4539 was assigned. Once Hyrum confirms, can > we consider CVE-2010-4539 to be a CVE identifier for A, issue > and request yet another / second one for B, issue? We didn't initially reserve CVEs for these vulnerabilities, but will be happy to update our documentation to reflect them. (See http://subversion.apache.org/security/ ) The two issues really are orthogonal, so B should probably not be included in a CVE for A. I've CC'd dev@...version.apache.org to help coordinate advisory authoring. -Hyrum
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.