First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 103894
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: Gentoo Security <security@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) <koon@gentoo.org>
Add CC:
CC:
Remove selected CCs
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Flags: Requestee:
 
 
  ()

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 103894 depends on: Show dependency tree
Bug 103894 blocks:

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)


Not eligible to see or edit group visibility for this bug.






View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug


Description:   Opened: 2005-08-27 02:10 0000
Exim ships its own (affected) copy of the libpcre library. See bug 103337 for
details on the vulnerability. There probably aren't much use of parsing of
untrusted PCRE in exim, but it should be fixed nevertheless.

The idea would be to make exim build against the system libpcre rather than
using the internal copy, which doesn't seem to be the case at the moment.

Ccing maintainers for inputs.

------- Comment #1 From Colin Morey 2005-08-30 08:27:54 0000 -------
Thanks for the heads up, As I understand it you have to be running some PCREs
at SMTP time to be 
vulnerable, and i believe the default config (as shipped by gentoo), doesn't
contain any PCREs.
Upstream has fixed the issue in the snapshot, and I'm expecting a fixed release
soon.

I could potentially backport the fixes, but i'd rather let someone else come up
with a patch against 
4.52, however i suspect 4.53 will be released before then.

Another solution would be to link directly against the external libpcre
library, but that's a fair chunk of 
changes to the ebuild, and means shipping a redundant copy of the code (ie in
the source tarball), and 
there will then be a backlash from that.

If any more information comes to light, i'll look into it again, but as it
stands, i'd like to wait until 
upstream releases their fix(es) (we can put the next version on accelerated
release path and mask lower 
versions if needs be).

------- Comment #2 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2005-08-30 08:29:59 0000 -------
Setting status to 'wait for upstream', downgrading severity

------- Comment #3 From Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen 2005-08-30 12:21:41 0000 -------
At some point I guess it would be nice if it linked against the external 
libpcre lib. 

------- Comment #4 From Colin Morey 2005-08-30 12:55:01 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> At some point I guess it would be nice if it linked against the external 
> libpcre lib. 

Please see para 4 in coment #1 for the main reasons why this won't be done any time soon unless 
absolutely necessary.

------- Comment #5 From Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen 2005-08-30 13:18:33 0000 -------
peitholm, it was a future request not a task for this bug. 

------- Comment #6 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2005-10-03 01:10:32 0000 -------
4.53 is out.

------- Comment #7 From Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen 2005-10-06 08:04:33 0000 -------
Colin does 4.53 solve this issue? 

------- Comment #8 From Colin Morey 2005-10-07 15:20:19 0000 -------
I believe it does, 4.53 should be hitting the tree soon, it needs some testing,
and i'm out tomorrow, but 
hopefully tomorrow evening.

------- Comment #9 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2005-10-12 02:25:44 0000 -------
4.54 is in.
Fixed PCRE (v6.2) is included since 4.53.

Arches should test and mark stable...

Target final KEYWORDS="x86 sparc hppa alpha amd64 ppc ia64"

Given that exploitation possibility is not obvious, you can take your time and
keyword "~" first if you prefer.

------- Comment #10 From Fernando J. Pereda (RETIRED) 2005-10-12 02:32:43 0000 -------
Why on earth were all the keywords removed ?

Maybe someone has to re-read our keywording policy ?

------- Comment #11 From Colin Morey 2005-10-12 09:15:35 0000 -------
which arch keywords in specific ferdy? (so i know which archs your a member
off, it's not listed on the dev 
list).

my personal policy has been that i will only add a keyword that I personally
have tested on, and given no 
one has said anything for a long time now... (looking at
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/
handbook/handbook.xml?part=3&chap=1 I see that my approach is wrong so i'll
comply even though i 
don't agree with current policy on this). 

koon, there are dependancies that haven't get been tested so it's not ready to
go stable... I'll draw up a list 
of these tonight. but its breifly the spf/srs stuff (which no arch has yet
marked stable).

------- Comment #12 From Fernando J. Pereda (RETIRED) 2005-10-12 09:23:03 0000 -------
In my particular case is alpha, but I see other keywords beeing dropped. In the
future if you want us to check that something works file us a bug and we'll
gladly test the package.

Cheers,
Ferdy

------- Comment #13 From Fernando J. Pereda (RETIRED) 2005-10-16 02:51:28 0000 -------
I keyworded ~alpha libsrs_alt-1.0_rc1-r1, libspf2-1.2.5-r1 and exim-4.54

Though libspf2 seems to work fine, the test suite is failing, is it suposed to
work ? (I can provide an excerpt if needed)

Cheers,
Ferdy

------- Comment #14 From René Nussbaumer 2005-10-17 01:42:21 0000 -------
Forget to remove hppa from cc. Do it now.

------- Comment #15 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2005-10-19 01:41:20 0000 -------
For the first pass :

amd64 should add ~amd64 to exim-4.54 when they keyword libspf2 the same.
ia64 should add ~ia64 to exim-4.54 when they keyword libspf2 and libsrs_alt the
same.

Then when sufficient time is spent in ~, feel free to keyword all stable.

------- Comment #16 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2005-10-24 07:57:21 0000 -------
Please test and mark exim 4.54 / libspf2 / libsrs_alt stable
Target KEYWORDS="amd64 alpha hppa ia64 ppc ~ppc64 sparc x86"

------- Comment #17 From Fernando J. Pereda (RETIRED) 2005-10-24 12:47:38 0000 -------
alpha done

------- Comment #18 From Michael Hanselmann (hansmi) (RETIRED) 2005-10-24 12:50:31 0000 -------
Stable on ppc and hppa.

------- Comment #19 From Marcin Kryczek (RETIRED) 2005-10-24 16:30:47 0000 -------
stable on x86

------- Comment #20 From Simon Stelling (RETIRED) 2005-10-27 11:51:26 0000 -------
amd64 stable

------- Comment #21 From Gustavo Zacarias (RETIRED) 2005-10-28 10:26:42 0000 -------
sparc stable.

------- Comment #22 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2005-10-28 11:34:52 0000 -------
Since this has no known security consequences (but is more a preventice thing),
no GLSA is needed.
Feel free to reopen if you disagree.

First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug