Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:54:57 +0800
From: Eugene Teo <>
Cc: Eugene Teo <>, "Steven M. Christey" <>
Subject: Re: CVE request: kernel: memory disclosure in 

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 6:49 AM, Steven M. Christey
<> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Eugene Teo wrote:
>> Eugene Teo wrote:
>> > [...]
>> > The fix for CVE-2009-0676 (upstream commit df0bca04) is incomplete. Note
>> > that the same problem of leaking kernel memory will reappear if someone
>> > on some architecture uses struct timeval with some internal padding (for
>> > example tv_sec 64-bit and tv_usec 32-bit) --- then, you are going to
>> > leak the padded bytes to userspace.
> Is this going to require a separate CVE identifier?  If a new minor
> version of the kernel wasn't released yet, then I'd consider the fix to be
> little more than a couple patch-discussion messages in a single Bugzilla
> entry.

No, it shouldn't. Please use the same CVE name. Thanks.


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.