Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2012 12:37:52 -0600
From: Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
CC: Jan Lieskovsky <jlieskov@...hat.com>,
        "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>,
        Vit Ondruch <vondruch@...hat.com>,
        Ruby Security Team <security@...y-lang.org>
Subject: Re: CVE Request -- ruby (1.8.x with patched CVE-2011-1005):
 Incomplete fix for CVE-2011-1005 for NameError#to_s method when used on objects

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/05/2012 09:26 AM, Jan Lieskovsky wrote:
> Hello Kurt, Steve, vendors,
> 
> Originally, Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures assigned an
> identifier of CVE-2011-1005 to the following vulnerability:
> 
> The safe-level feature in Ruby 1.8.6 through 1.8.6-420, 1.8.7 
> through 1.8.7-330, and 1.8.8dev allows context-dependent attackers
> to modify strings via the Exception#to_s method, as demonstrated by
> changing an intended pathname.
> 
> with the following upstream patch: [1]
> http://svn.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi?revision=30903&view=revision
>
>  Based on later upstream patch for different (CVE-2012-4464 and
> CVE-2012-4466) issues: [2]
> http://svn.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi?view=revision&revision=37068
>
>  it was found that original upstream 1.8.x ruby patch for
> CVE-2011-1005 issue was not complete, when the NameError#to_s()
> method was used on / with Ruby objects (the test logic in
> 'test_to_s_taintness_propagation' test from [1] was actually
> reversed {Hint: Compare the test for Ruby Object cases in both [1]
> and [2]}, so the test returned success also on still vulnerable
> instances).
> 
> A different vulnerability than CVE-2011-1005, CVE-2012-4464, and
> CVE-2012-4466.
> 
> References: [3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863484
> 
> This issue was discovered by Vit Ondruch of Red Hat.
> 
> Ruby Security Team previously in a private email to Vit confirmed 
> (still) presence of this issue on ruby 1.8.7 versions and provided 
> a patch for it: <snip> The behavior of SVN trunk is correct.
> 
> The fix for CVE-2011-1005 was insufficient, and NameError#to_s has
> a problem in 1.8.7.
> 
> Please apply the attached patch for 1.8.7.
> 
> -- Shugo Maeda
> 
> error.c.diff
> 
> --- error.c.orig	2012-10-04 23:26:42.000611741 +0900 +++ error.c
> 2012-10-04 23:26:48.960524245 +0900 @@ -665,9 +665,6 @@
> 
> if (NIL_P(mesg)) return rb_class_name(CLASS_OF(exc)); 
> StringValue(str); -    if (str != mesg) { -	OBJ_INFECT(str, mesg); 
> -    } return str; }
> 
> </snip>
> 
> Could you allocate a CVE identifier to this (for those package
> versions, which have applied patch for originally CVE-2011-1005
> already)?
> 
> Thank you && Regards, Jan. -- Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat
> Security Response Team
> 

Please use CVE-2012-4481 for this issue.

- -- 
Kurt Seifried Red Hat Security Response Team (SRT)
PGP: 0x5E267993 A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=5BI3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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.