|
Message-Id: <201405220341.s4M3fNO5002449@linus.mitre.org> Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 23:41:23 -0400 (EDT) From: cve-assign@...re.org To: kent.baxley@...onical.com Cc: cve-assign@...re.org, oss-security@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: CVE request, multiple vulnerabilities in openwsman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > https://github.com/Openwsman/openwsman/releases/tag/v2.4.4 > A recent security code review was performed on openwsman version 2.4.3 > and several issues were identified and fixed in version 2.4.4. > > Can we please get CVEs assigned to them? There isn't enough information in this request. These commit messages don't describe how an attack can occur that crosses privilege boundaries, or explain why the apparently mishandled data comes from an untrusted source. A CVE ID can't be assigned solely on the basis of locating code that is potentially unsafe or simply wrong. For example, we don't assign CVE IDs on the basis of output produced by the Coverity Scan service, and we also don't assign CVE IDs on the basis of similar detail generated in a manual review. At this point, we aren't going to comment separately on each of the commits but here are some initial observations: https://github.com/Openwsman/openwsman/commit/a61b2074a90c9fb3019f49b6b347ad651a3f80af char buf[20]; sprintf(buf, "PT%fS", options->expires); ==> snprintf(buf, 20, "PT%fS", options->expires); The source code says "unsigned long expires; // expiration time in msecs since the epoch." Are there values of options->expires that can occur, but result in too many characters with the format string? If so, would it make sense to reject those options->expires values, or use a larger buffer, instead of using snprintf with the same buffer size as before? The filename is src/lib/wsman-client.c. Would this typically be used only by a client application, e.g., an application that calls the wsman_create_client function? Are there realistic use cases in which the expires value is untrusted: for example, it originates in a web form, or the application is installed setuid and can be executed by unprivileged users? In other words, can untrusted input be used for privilege escalation, or in a denial of service attack affecting a client that was supposed to remain running for additional users? https://github.com/Openwsman/openwsman/commit/09c3fcf4d209f6890eb9cb9e554bff637eae73b5 Does this depend on misconfiguration, or is it exploitable by an attacker against a realistic installation of the product? In other words, is the essential problem that, if the product or machine is misconfigured so that required repository pathnames don't exist or have permission problems, then an application could crash? https://github.com/Openwsman/openwsman/commit/ca68ddd7c24b238cbb94bc97ffac349ff25f07bf Does this mean that the product would realistically be reading an attacker-controlled XML document, and could crash? char *subcode_value = ws_xml_get_xpath_value(doc, FAULT_SUBCODE_VALUE_XPATH); ... if (strlen(subcode_value) == 0) return; Can a zero-length return value occur? The source code has: char *ws_xml_get_xpath_value(WsXmlDocH doc, char *expression) { return xml_parser_get_xpath_value(doc, expression); } char *xml_parser_get_xpath_value(WsXmlDocH doc, const char *expression) ... return NULL; Given that the function's return value can be NULL, why does the patched code still call strlen on this value? - -- CVE assignment team, MITRE CVE Numbering Authority M/S M300 202 Burlington Road, Bedford, MA 01730 USA [ PGP key available through http://cve.mitre.org/cve/request_id.html ] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (SunOS) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTfXD2AAoJEKllVAevmvms+mgH/js/m9qIp7BP9A8BTWnemEHB GZH8bAHaJYYAk2dmWA47Ons7FWu17ufdPhsrfSFVxR+qQUrcYJCp0/9N8ZM6Wdtq fYzZVT+F4K4pohJSQpRLKdZEIPefT6md8gqm55fQvDh/Wsgl5EYMs8e2kIKyyOwL 4EGSLiZfXScWJW4FnWrqHz2PyMWhujZpLY2l3Vo5q1UxyODJyDGaPAhaRtsI/2PP DqkkBEiDKFzsFfJN/yFTF0T20ezkLAZDqcPxlMcROLrFeHKgOss3znImnO2VkwiK FRxvPcN4seUoGCzfzHAAeDaN3eE3E/epKAUIUnP0Htw3JIvRdKoQGKQsZuvTChw= =zRqc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
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.