Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:18:57 -0400
From: Dan Rosenberg <>
Cc: "Steven M. Christey" <>
Subject: Re: CVE request: ghostscript

Perhaps they're not identical, but they certainly seem related.  I
noticed that the upstream patch is for "psi/iscan.c", which is where
the overflow for CVE-2010-1869 takes place, and both appear to be due
to the same trivial case of long PostScript/PDF identifiers.  In this
case, the overflow appears to occur in the conversion of a PDF to a
PostScript file.


On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Vincent Danen <> wrote:
> * [2010-07-12 12:48:35 -0400] Dan Rosenberg wrote:
>> I believe this is identical to CVE-2010-1869
>> (
> They don't look identical to me.  Patches differ, upstream bugs differ.
> Can't really do anything hands-on to test since the PoC attached to the
> upstream bug is private.
>> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Marc Deslauriers
>> <> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I don't think this ever got a CVE:
>>> A memory corruption vulnerability in Ghostscript 8.64 and earlier caused
>>> by long names can lead to arbitrary code execution.
> --
> Vincent Danen / 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.