Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 11:54:16 +0100
From: Thomas Biege <>
Subject: Re: CVE request: xpdf

Should CVE-IDs be assigned to this issues?

Am Freitag 21 Januar 2011 00:15:49 schrieb Dan Rosenberg:
> I identified two issues in xpdf.  I don't think the first requires a
> CVE, since it's incredibly unlikely to be exploitable, but I include
> it here in case someone disagrees.
> 1. Due to an integer overflow when parsing CharCodes for fonts and a
> failure to check the return value of a memory allocation, it is
> possible to trigger writes to a narrow range of offsets from a NULL
> pointer.  The chance of being able to exploit this for anything other
> than a crash is very remote: on x86 32-bit, there's no chance (since
> the write occurs between 0xffffffc4 and 0xfffffffc).  At least the
> write lands in valid userspace on x86-64, but in my testing this
> memory is never mapped.  Fixed in poppler commit at [1], hopefully
> fixed soon at xpdf upstream.
> 2. Malformed commands may cause corruption of the internal stack used
> to maintain graphics contexts, leading to potentially exploitable
> memory corruption.  Fixed in poppler commit at [2], hopefully fixed
> soon at xpdf upstream.
> -Dan
> [1]
> [2]

 Thomas Biege <>, SUSE LINUX, Security Support & Auditing
 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)
  Wer aufhoert besser werden zu wollen, hoert auf gut zu sein.
                            -- Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

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.