[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20140912183958.D1DA96C000A@smtpvmsrv1.mitre.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 14:39:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: cve-assign@...re.org
To: mmcallis@...hat.com
Cc: cve-assign@...re.org, oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [CVE Requests] rsync and librsync collisions
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> The below still require a CVE or two (unless MITRE disagrees).
>> I think there should be CVEs assigned for this:
>>
>> rsync: MD5 collision DoS attack or limited file corruption
>> librsync: MD4 collision file corruption
>>
>> Note: librsync is not the same code, protocol or maintainer as rsync.
The short answer is that we neither agree nor disagree at present; we
think that either any required CVE assignment can be made by us after
a full public disclosure, or any required CVE assignment can be made
by a different CNA now.
Further details: MITRE has been contacted about this rsync and
librsync report through multiple channels. The reply that we sent
wasn't previously copied here because it didn't seem to be about a
publicly known vulnerability.
MITRE has no role in determining the list charter, but
http://oss-security.openwall.org/wiki/mailing-lists/oss-security says
"List Content Guidelines ... Public security issues only please."
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/07/28/1 says "my last
response from Wayne was effectively denying that this is a
vulnerability" and "I won't provide full details yet, but if any
distributions would like some collisions to perform specific tests
(perhaps on Openstack Swift), please get in contact privately."
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/08/05/7 adds "I have
provided a privileged few with PoC" and "My plan was to wait for fixes
before releasing the full write-up and code."
Our feeling is that, if the issue is not really public, sending a CVE
request to the oss-security list is not a standard procedure. It seems
that the simplest way forward would occur if one of the
above-mentioned "privileged few" is a CNA on the
http://cve.mitre.org/cve/cna.html list. They can evaluate the
information that they have and make one or more CVE assignments. If
the meaning of the CVE assignments is understandable without referring
to the non-public details, then it might be useful to send the CVE
assignments here, even before the full public disclosure.
MITRE is not currently interested in receiving an advance copy of the
full public disclosure or any related PoC information from anyone.
We'll see whether the CNA process above can work.
- --
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)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUEz2bAAoJEKllVAevmvmspzoH/j4aV6Ce69mB8+g2WKRptewL
UpFZGzQF8dJWn0s1JWYYFLK+RA3iNUPdKLH+5j517xYhySq/lAOWtivJf8nhWM6O
0/3NKvKYDGJO/6lAOV15YvxDYKMfoyvV6/koGwrenegHcLbtAukTk6XT1bwK1nKO
XTy3ZaGipi5csyq2qGIkLGFIqGxOQRPXgv1Byjo4J412esCJDwgEhoTOqxo73pWC
fV235YYG8l/bKWIBGpQwUh7De4slhrz0lycGghxcOj5PpE2Blp9UyoOHlb2coJxu
jeaWTZhsa6TpFeFh1xL/MoZCSLm2ag5y/2wq/HBaIKcezRZp37K9yTbRoJqYAlQ=
=FTO9
-----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.
