Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:39:43 +0800
From: Eugene Teo <>
CC: "Steven M. Christey" <>
Subject: Re: CVE request: kernel: memory disclosure in 	SO_BSDCOMPAT

Eugene Teo wrote:
> 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.

But you might want to add the link to the new CVE-2009-0676 patch in:

Thanks, Eugene
Eugene Teo / Red Hat Security Response Team

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.