[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <552E83F7.9070704@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 17:29:59 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
CC: cve-assign@...re.org
Subject: Re: Re: Problems in automatic crash analysis frameworks
On 04/14/2015 05:55 PM, cve-assign@...re.org wrote:
> This is mostly a question for the persons who assigned CVE-2015-1318
> and CVE-2015-1862. Should these CVE assignments be interpreted to
> mean:
>
> CVE-2015-1318 - in Apport, an unprivileged user can use a
> namespace-based attack because there is an execve by
> root after a chroot into a user-specified directory
>
> CVE-2015-1862 - in ABRT, an unprivileged user can use a
> namespace-based attack because there is an execve by
> root after a chroot into a user-specified directory
>
> with "Furthermore, Abrt suffers from numerous race conditions and
> symlink problems" not yet mapped to any CVE IDs?
Yes, that's how most of us assumed how the assignments were made, but
there is quite a bit of confusion about CVE-2015-1862 because Tavis and
others associated it with the raceabrt.c exploit.
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security
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.
