Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 00:37:09 +1300 From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@...enet.co.nz> To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: CVE-2015-0881 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 22/02/2015 7:17 p.m., Kurt Seifried wrote: > I'm trying to track down information on CVE-2015-0881. > > I can't find a squid security contact (security@...id-cache.org > bounced), there's no security report, and no link to a source code > patch for this. - From the "Contact Us page" (<http://www.squid-cache.org/Support/contact.html>) squid-bugs @ lists.squid-cache.org ... which goes to me and some other trusted developers. I dont mind direct contacts for this type of thing, but the main contact address guarantees someone sees it within a few hrs. Regarding the CVE: 1) This is the first I've heard about this particular CVE number assignment. 2) I did have some discusions with JPCERT about _a_ response splitting vulnerability around those years. But the messages from them were IIRC about replicating response splitting in a 2.x versions which were incompletely fixed by: <http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v2/2.5/bugs/#squid-2.5.STABLE7-header_parsing> (did not get a CVE AFAIK). 3) I have not been able to replicate the #2 issue in the Squid-3 series and several iterations of changes to the parsers there have been careful to take the above issue into account. So I'm not sure where the 3.1.10 comes from. Assuming it is the same vulnerability. > > This is regarding 3.1.9 and earlier, 3.1.10 was released on 22 Dec > 2010, so 4+ years ago. > > Needless to say I am more than a bit confused. A link to a specific > code patch/vuln/file would be helpful. Also if anyone knows how to > contact Squid re security issues properly I'd love to know. > I'm not sure 3.1.10 is the right version for attribution on any response splitting fix. There certainly were no patches solving anything related to respinse splitting in that version. Some borderline memory leak vulnerabilities perhapse, but not response splitting. NP: Just to confuse things there was a major replacement of the HTTP request-line parser on the 2015-02-10 which does explicitly fix all lot of known HTTP request-line parse issues, including a few response splitting vectors using downgrade to HTTP/0.9 handling. That will only be in the 3.6 series though. Amos Jeffries Squid Software Foundation -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU6b9lAAoJELJo5wb/XPRj96YH/AxZFBWFpVoGPVMeNFz+X/NV C7Z/HgUpYDH04x0wqWJMZH9ew/WiIu+AE7VzI8D83TDv0K9hyY7jctxXHm0Y3yUH tX4T/oScKuvr7P6i91CB3MQO3TRJvKRHc/SS0V0wRMFZNajf/sS6uaFUjkQzH9Gu 4GVVc8bm1rJtoskeCOrT/EH06Ntb9PNl0CE3DbaEO+3F4e1hpmTGgeqXI6FStXHe Ftq65qUJ4SbyONpeiXfs66UsBMUMYitBy+5pbv8U5tk0jc8vXlVOIO6Bh7S2uLog g45mi/jpyLOpjoCD4zktXDOQR6ma+Smo8GEngpjf5SNTfppKucxS1v+H0XDujX8= =x6x4 -----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.