[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160314132652.4530b528@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 13:26:52 +0100
From: Tomas Hoger <thoger@...hat.com>
To: Steve Kemp <steve@...ve.org.uk>
Cc: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: CVE-Request - GNU Awk.
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 06:32:28 +0000 Steve Kemp wrote:
> I reported two DoS bugs against GNU Awk to the debian
> bug tracker recently, both of which are denial of service
> attacks causing NULL-pointer deferences.
>
> It would be useful to have a CVE identifiers assigned.
Why should these get a CVE? As you state in one of your reports:
While I appreciate that passing untrusted code to gawk is not a
common thing to do, I do not believe that it should be possible to
trigger a segfault though.
Why should that be considered a valid / safe use case at all? If
something makes awk run untrusted programs, there's code execution
problem already:
echo | awk '{ system("id") }'
--
Tomas Hoger / 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.
