Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 23:16:41 -0700
From: Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: A small backlog of vulnerabilities in Chicken
 Scheme

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

On 02/06/2013 07:29 PM, Kurt Seifried wrote:
> Sorry for the delay, it's been a crazy couple of weeks.
> 
> On 02/02/2013 06:59 AM, Peter Bex wrote:
>> Hello all,
> 
>> Recently a handful of security bugs have been found and fixed in 
>> the Chicken Scheme compiler (http://www.call-cc.org).  We (the
>> core team) have decided we'd like to start using CVE identifiers
>> for the benefit of our users and distributions.
> 
>> I'd like to request CVEs for the currently known security bugs:
> 
>> * POSIX select() buffer overrun, fixed on in Chicken 4.8.2 
>> (development snapshot) by switching to POSIX poll() on platforms 
>> where supported. This is also fixed in 4.8.0.1 (stability 
>> release).
> 
>> Original announcement, with workaround (followed by preliminary 
>> patch): 
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken-users/2012-06/msg00031.html
>
>> 
> 
> Final patch:
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken-hackers/2012-11/msg00075.html
>
>> 
> Can
> 
> you list the versions released that included the broken and correct
> patch? thanks.

Please use CVE-2012-6122 for this issue.

>> * Poisoned NUL byte injection due to incomplete protection by 
>> missing checks in some procedures, fixed in Chicken 4.8.0: 
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken-users/2012-09/msg00004.html

Please
>> 
use CVE-2012-6123 for this issue.

>> * Broken randomization procedure on 64-bit platforms (it
>> returned a constant value).  This function wasn't used for
>> security purposes (and is advertised as being unsuitable), so I'm
>> unsure a CVE is needed: 
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken-hackers/2012-02/msg00084.html
>
>> 
> Fixed in 4.8.0.
> 
> no problem here, will assign once other Q's are answered.

Please use CVE-2012-6124 for this issue.


>> * Vulnerability to algorithmic complexity attacks due to hash 
>> table collisions.  Fixed in 4.8.0. First public confirmation of
>> the issue, with preliminary (broken) patch: 
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken-hackers/2012-01/msg00002.html
>
>> 
> 
> 
> Proper fix:
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken-hackers/2012-01/msg00020.html
>
>> 
> Can
> 
> you list the versions released that included the broken and correct
> patch? thanks.

Please use CVE-2012-6125 for this issue.

>> Please let me know if more info is required or if this is even
>> the proper way to request CVEs.
> 
>> I'd also like to know if it's possible to get CVE numbers
>> assigned *before* issuing a security advisory, but without
>> immediate full disclosure, so an initial advisory can be complete
>> with CVE number.
> 
> Yup see the HOWTO. Initially I'll require full info up front to
> make sure CVE split/merge is done correct, but this wouldn't go
> past me, and if you can't trust me, well, then you go to Mitre I
> guess =). Longer term depends on the quality of CVE requests,
> basically if you learn to do them right and do them consistently
> right I'll require less info/trust you.
> 
>> The CVE can be updated afterwards with the link to the advisory 
>> when it is issued.  This should make it easier for users to find 
>> information about the bug.  This list's Openwall wiki seems to 
>> imply that it's only possible to request a CVE for an issue
>> given all the information immediately, but a recent message from
>> Kurt Seifried in a thread about Jenkins says that it can be done.
>> If it's indeed okay to e-mail Kurt directly, it would be helpful
>> to include this in the documentation wiki.
> 
>> Finally, how do CVE entries in MITRE and/or the NVD get updated?
>> I couldn't find anything about this in the FAQ.  For example, if
>> we find and fix a noncritical vulnerability but the fix is rather
>>  complicated and needs to be thoroughly tested, the fix might 
>> appear in a release after CVE and advisory are issued.  How will 
>> this be reflected in the information once the version in which
>> the fix appears is finally known?

email cve-assign@...re.org for all these things. I just assign CVE's,
Mitre handles the entries/write ups/database/etc.

> 
>> Cheers, Peter Bex (on behalf of the Chicken core team)
> 
> 
> 
> 

- -- 
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 v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
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=KCO9
-----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.