Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 08:25:58 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: <cve-assign@...re.org>
Cc: <oss-security@...ts.openwall.com>,<security@....org>
Subject: Re: Xen Security Advisory 84 - integer overflow in several
 XSM/Flask hypercalls

>>> On 06.02.14 at 18:23, <cve-assign@...re.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> We can provide the three CVE assignments for XSA-84 (as well as the
> one CVE assignment for XSA-85 and the one CVE assignment for XSA-86).
> However, could you please clarify:
> 
>> http://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-84.html 
> 
>> UPDATES IN VERSION 2
>> ====================
>> 
>> Public release.
>> 
>> The patch for 4.1 was extended to cover a few further similar issues.
> 
> Here, was the original scope of "The patch for 4.1" (before it was
> extended) exclusively:
> 
>   "a different overflow issue on FLASK_{GET,SET}BOOL and expose
>    unreasonably large memory allocation to arbitrary guests"
> 
> ? Or do you mean that, originally, the "patch for 4.1" addressed
> another vulnerability, and this "different overflow issue" was one of
> the version-2 extensions to the scope of XSA-84?

The original patch was dealing with just the unbounded memory
allocation. The missing bounds checking was what the incremental
addition dealt with.

Jan

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.