Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 11:44:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: Bob Friesenhahn <>
Subject: Re: Thousands of vulnerabilities, almost no CVEs:

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
>> Most oss-fuzz issue detections are not CVE worthy.  For example, a
>> one-byte read "heap overflow" is not likely to cause any actual harm
>> but oss-fuzz would classify it as "heap overflow".
> There's enough information in the report though to assign the severity
> score depending on the access size, its type (read or write) the call
> stack etc.
> OSS-Fuzz deliberately doesn't do that now, but such scoring can be
> done to prune the list of potential CVE candidates.

Oss-fuzz does not take into account the important criteria which is 
the actual underlying size of the heap allocation.  It is true that 
this is implementation specific, but if the underlying heap allocation 
is larger than the requested allocation, the program might not be 

Bob Friesenhahn,
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,
Public Key,

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.