Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 05:26:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jan Lieskovsky <>
To: Breno Silva <>
Cc: "Steven M. Christey" <>,, Athmane Madjoudj <>
Subject: Re: Re: CVE Request -- ModSecurity (X < 2.7.3):
 Vulnerable to XXE attacks

Hi Breno,

  (Cc-ing Athmane on this due reasons which will get obvious below).

  thank you for checking with us.

AFAICT to fix this in Fedora and Fedora EPEL-6 versions, we have
just rebased to latest upstream 2.7.3 version. But you are truly
right (assuming this being the reason you are checking with us),
that on Fedora EPEL-5 we are shipping older (2.6.8 based version
of ModSecurity).


it's wasn't immediately clear how the backported upstream patch
would look like in / against that version (and not completely
sure we can just rebase in that product too - Athmane could you
clarify here if we can rebase or would rather want upstream patch
form against 2.6.8 version?)

Breno, so if you are willing to help (and Athmane would confirm
we need patch against 2.6.8 version), it would be appreciated
if you could provide it.

That's just for our expectations. Obviously other vendors might
be interested in upstream patch backports against different versions
yet (but I will let them to speak out their needs by themselves).

Thank you for your time / check anyway. It's appreciated.

Regards, Jan.
Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat Security Response Team

----- Original Message -----
Hello Jan,

Are you guys backporting de patch to old versions of ModSecurity ?



On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Jan Lieskovsky <> wrote:

> Hello Kurt, Steve, Breno, vendors,
>   ModSecurity upstream has released v2.7.3 version:
> [1]
> correcting one security flaw (from [2]):
> "It was reported that the XML files parser of ModSecurity,
> a security module for the Apache HTTP Server, was vulnerable
> to XML External Entity attacks. A remote attacker could
> provide a specially-crafted XML file that, when processed
> might lead to local files disclosure or, potentially,
> excessive resources (memory, CPU) consumption."
> References:
> [2]
> [3]
> [4]
> Relevant upstream patch (seems to be the following):
> [5]
> Could you allocate a CVE id [*] for this?
> Thank you && Regards, Jan.
> --
> Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat Security Response Team
> [*] According to:
>     there doesn't seem to have been a CVE id allocated for this issue yet.

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.