Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:34:24 +0100 From: Jean-Baptiste Kempf <jb@...eolan.org> To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com> Cc: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com, Assign a CVE Identifier <cve-assign@...re.org>, VideoLAN Security Team <security@...eolan.org> Subject: Re: CVE request: BD-J implementation in libbluray On 23 Feb, Florian Weimer wrote : > > As for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=959434 > > > > "Fixing it would not change anything. Xlet (that requests the mount, or is > > being executed from the mount) could as well uncompress the files by self > > where it wants, even download other files from internet." > > > > So, maybe you want to have a full Xlet sandboxing? Or is it something > > else? > > Yes, I do think full sandboxing is required because content publishers > have attacked end user system integrity in the past, so I don't think > they can be trusted. BD-J code comes from Blu-Rays. Downloading non-official blurays and executing it is like taking random binaries from internet and running them. Patches are welcome, though... With my kindest regards, -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf http://www.jbkempf.com/ - +33 672 704 734 Sent from my Electronic Device
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.