oss-security - Re: Minor security flaw with pam

Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:18:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: Josh Bressers <bressers@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: coley <coley@...re.org>
Subject: Re: Minor security flaw with pam_xauth

----- "Solar Designer" <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:

Thank you for doing this, it's most apprecited.

> 
> pam_xauth missing return value checks from setuid() and similar calls,
> fixed in Linux-PAM 1.1.2 - CVE-2010-3316
> 
> pam_env and pam_mail accessing the target user's files as root (and thus
> susceptible to attacks by the user) in Linux-PAM below 1.1.2, partially
> fixed in 1.1.2 - no CVE ID mentioned yet

Use CVE-2010-3435 for this one.


> 
> pam_env and pam_mail in Linux-PAM 1.1.2 not switching fsgid (or egid) and
> groups when accessing the target user's files (and thus potentially
> susceptible to attacks by the user) - CVE-2010-3430
> 
> pam_env and pam_mail in Linux-PAM 1.1.2 not checking whether the
> setfsuid() calls succeed (no known impact with current Linux kernels, but
> poor practice in general) - CVE-2010-3431
> 
> Now, in case someone fixes CVE-2010-3430 but fails to add return value
> checks for the added calls, we'll need yet another CVE ID for the partial
> fix... but I hope this won't happen.
> 

Let's hope not. I guess if they do, they can request a new ID.

Thanks.

-- 
    JB

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.