[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 13:08:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: cve-assign@...re.org
To: jamie@...onical.com, thoger@...hat.com
Cc: cve-assign@...re.org, oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: cups-browsed remote exploit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
The vulnerability that remains in cups-filters 1.0.51 (in the
generate_local_queue function, the input sanitization also needs to be
used for the host variable, but wasn't used for that) is assigned
CVE-2014-4336. This is fixed in cups-filters 1.0.53. This is the
vulnerability that exists because of an incomplete fix for
CVE-2014-2707.
The second vulnerability addressed in cups-filters 1.0.53 (OOB
accesses in the process_browse_data function when reading the packet
variable, leading to a crash after a remote attack) is assigned
CVE-2014-4337.
For the third vulnerability addressed in cups-filters 1.0.53:
> - cups-browsed: SECURITY FIX: Fix on usage of the
> "BrowseAllow" directive in cups-browsed.conf. Before, if the
> argument of a "BrowseAllow" directive is not understood it
> is treated as the directive not having been there, allowing
> any host if this was the only "BrowseAllow" directive. Now
> we treat this as a directive which no host can fulfill, not
> allowing any host if it was the only one.
the vendor is announcing it as a security fix, so it is assigned
CVE-2014-4338. It also seems likely that the previous behavior was
actually an implementation error. (Apparently, this only allows
attacks against systems for which the administrator created a
malformed configuration file. A vendor could instead choose to have an
explicit security policy that the product's behavior is undefined in
the case of a malformed configuration file.)
Two additional notes:
> This issue was reported as fixed in 1.0.51:
> http://bzr.linuxfoundation.org/loggerhead/openprinting/cups-filters/revision/7188
The code fix itself seems to be
http://bzr.linuxfoundation.org/loggerhead/openprinting/cups-filters/revision/7189
instead. Also, https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871327
mentions CVE-2014-2707, but the attachment in 871327 is apparently
only the CVE-2014-4336 and CVE-2014-4337 patch, not the CVE-2014-2707
patch. However, 871327 isn't directly trying to define what
CVE-2014-2707 means, so this can be considered a minor anomaly.
- --
CVE assignment team, MITRE CVE Numbering Authority
M/S M300
202 Burlington Road, Bedford, MA 01730 USA
[ PGP key available through http://cve.mitre.org/cve/request_id.html ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (SunOS)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJToxitAAoJEKllVAevmvmsR4IH/0XLDQd6TouMqkwHjj86tv8D
mn3CVcZovqZRQIWBRYj4OlH5sgPyzTGrHR1KVw7FLfe81T3Qwj6eMptZD7qXXbRP
ABkTEf+N2HP/7BAh46kCZhpgSvS7QSa9UX41thh1WmBSBSd2cdL2wvdcmkaeapVZ
Ip2nT21w/ou1B3yS8NYlVwiAXWj84GclNTbLY31bKVSTd3KSKDKsHa4kCkfEGAlG
4VKGioh4Y1aiBOxnYjerAxBg+nL3Vhq+mH21hTTfPifpg6vKBmtqVMuXuOVQ60Kb
uE7MT8HA+SPGSE+84s7fjUVvx95M0j+MQHUEr/Y+QLM2j6qj96/xy1BED6ZxkwA=
=1ezq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
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.
