[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <525B97E8.7090408@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 18:06:16 +1100
From: Murray McAllister <mmcallis@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
CC: Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com>,
Assign a CVE Identifier <cve-assign@...re.org>,
Huzaifa Sidhpurwala <huzaifas@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Re: browser document.cookie DoS vulnerability
On 10/12/2013 03:32 PM, Kurt Seifried wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/11/2013 11:34 AM, Joel Weinberger wrote:
>> Hi there. Yes, we do CVEs, but in this case, we consider this very
>> low severity and will not be creating a CVE for it. Sorry for the
>> delayed response for it! --Joel
>
> So to confirm you are saying this is NOT a security issue in any way
> shape or form? I find this odd because DoS's in web browsers are often
> considered CVE worthy. Is there something in this issue that prevent
> exploitation/etc? If not then it deserves a CVE even if it is a "low"
> issue.
>
> - --
> Kurt Seifried Red Hat Security Response Team (SRT)
> PGP: 0x5E267993 A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993
I don't think web browser dos's are suppose to be CVE worthy. Our (Red
Hat) advisories for Firefox and Thunderbird mention "crash...", but they
probably should not (my fault, sorry ;)).
Adding Huzaifa to Cc.
--
Murray McAllister / 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.
