[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+z51A5LsQOLaSsKJGuF0GkJJ+jHOeKWDZcu5CUDrMA8c+ySrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 09:58:23 +0200
From: Shad Laws <shad@...dlaws.com>
To: Jan Lieskovsky <jlieskov@...hat.com>
Cc: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com,
"Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>,
Gallery3 Security Team <security@...leryproject.org>
Subject: Re: CVE Request -- gallery3 (3.0.9): Fixing two security flaws
Hello everyone,
A quick clarification on issue #2: the problem wasn't the item information
or paths, but rather the original-sized image file.
A legitimate user with "view" privileges for an item should be able to:
- get the item info and image file links (e.g.
".../rest/data/123?size=thumb", etc.)
- follow the links and get the "thumb" and "resize" image files themselves.
- guess the "full" image file link without thinking too hard (e.g.
".../rest/data/123?size=full")
- follow the link and get the "full" image file itself **ONLY** if they
have "view_full" access.
The problem was that this last condition wasn't being properly enforced.
Thanks again, and sorry for the delay in response!
Shad
On 4 July 2013 11:19, Jan Lieskovsky <jlieskov@...hat.com> wrote:
> Hello Kurt, Steve, vendors,
>
> Gallery upstream has released 3.0.9 version, correcting two security
> flaws:
> [1] http://galleryproject.org/gallery_3_0_9
>
> My guess [***] is the two issues are as follows:
>
> * Issue #1 - Improper stripping of URL fragments in flowplayer
> SWF file might lead to reply attacks (a different flaw than CVE-2013-2138):
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> A security flaw was found in the way flowplayer SWF file handling
> functionality
> of Gallery version 3, an open source project with the goal to develop and
> support leading photo sharing web application solutions, processed
> certain
> URL fragments passed to this file (certain URL fragments were not
> stripped
> properly when these files were called via direct URL request(s)). A
> remote
> attacker could use this flaw to conduct replay attacks.
>
> A different vulnerability than CVE-2013-2138.
>
> Upstream ticket:
> [2] http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/2073
>
> Relevant upstream patch:
> [3]
> https://github.com/gallery/gallery3/commit/c5318bb1a2dd266b50317a2adb74d74338593733
>
> References:
> [4] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=981197
>
> * Issue #2 - gallery3: Multiple information exposure flaws in data rest
> core module
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Multiple information exposure flaws were found in the way data rest core
> module
> of Gallery version 3, an open source project with the goal to develop
> and support
> leading photo sharing web application solutions, used to previously
> restrict access
> to certain items of the photo album. A remote attacker, valid Gallery 3
> user, could
> use this flaw to possibly obtain sensitive information (file, resize or
> thumb path
> of the item in question).
>
> Upstream ticket:
> [5] http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/2074
>
> Relevant upstream patch (against 3.0.x branch):
> [6]
> https://github.com/gallery/gallery3/commit/cbbcf1b4791762d7da0ea7b6c4f4b551a4d9caed
>
> References:
> [7] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=981198
>
> Could you allocate CVE identifiers for these?
>
> Thank you && Regards, Jan.
> --
> Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat Security Response Team
>
> [***] Guess because the issues aren't more thoroughly described in
> upstream announcement [1]
> and former (private) email check with Gallery3 upstream didn't
> provide more details
> either. Cc-ed them on this post too, they to correct me where
> necessary.
>
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.
