Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 153752 - x11-libs/libX11 1.0.2 and 1.0.3 file descriptor leak (CVE-2006-5397)
Summary: x11-libs/libX11 1.0.2 and 1.0.3 file descriptor leak (CVE-2006-5397)
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Security
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Vulnerabilities (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High minor (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Security
URL: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug...
Whiteboard: B4 [stable?] Falco
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-11-01 14:41 UTC by Matt Drew (RETIRED)
Modified: 2006-12-14 05:42 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments
CVE-2006-5397.patch (CVE-2006-5397.patch,296 bytes, patch)
2006-11-03 07:42 UTC, Joshua Baergen (RETIRED)
no flags Details | Diff
libX11-1.0.3-r1.ebuild (libX11-1.0.3-r1.ebuild,1.01 KB, text/plain)
2006-11-03 07:46 UTC, Joshua Baergen (RETIRED)
no flags Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Matt Drew (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-01 14:41:11 UTC
http://secunia.com/advisories/22642/

http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2006-5397

Kees Cook found a file descriptor leak in the Xinput module, which is optionally read from the XCOMPOSEFILE environment variable.  Looks like it is fixed in git, but the fix won't be out till the 1.1 release.

1.0.1 is apparently not vulnerable.
Comment 1 Joshua Baergen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-03 07:36:48 UTC
I'm working on 1.0.3-r1 which will include the patch from upstream.
Comment 2 Joshua Baergen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-03 07:42:17 UTC
Created attachment 101141 [details, diff]
CVE-2006-5397.patch

Fix from upstream.
Comment 3 Joshua Baergen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-03 07:46:59 UTC
Created attachment 101143 [details]
libX11-1.0.3-r1.ebuild

Ebuild that includes the patch.
Comment 4 Joshua Baergen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-03 07:47:41 UTC
I probably won't be able to commit these for 2-4 hours.  I'm assuming I'm clear to do so since this issue is already public?
Comment 5 Donnie Berkholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-03 11:14:20 UTC
Our xterm does not install sgid, so I don't think there is really any effect of this. From the upstream bug:

"So far xterm seems to be the only problematic app (setgid), but with its normal
gid no security relevant files can be accessed."
Comment 6 Joshua Baergen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-03 16:04:24 UTC
Yeah, it didn't seem like it was particularly exploitable.  I do think it should go into the tree, but maybe we just don't need to rush stabilization.
Comment 7 Donnie Berkholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-03 18:09:21 UTC
Not only that, but I don't feel there's any need for a GLSA either unless you want to send one out that says "Hi, this isn't really an exploit on Gentoo but since other people are sending advisories, we will too"
Comment 8 Donnie Berkholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-03 18:32:00 UTC
Hm. On more thinking, it's conceivable that the problem could result in access to files owned by the utmp group via libutempter.
Comment 9 Joshua Baergen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-03 22:16:09 UTC
I've put 1.0.3-r1 into the tree with the above patch.
Comment 10 Donnie Berkholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-04 11:28:46 UTC
It would be useful if a security audit person could determine whether this actually affects us in any way, given that our xterm is not sgid and uses the sgid libutempter instead.
Comment 11 Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-20 22:58:43 UTC
Falco, any news on this one?
Comment 12 Raphael Marichez (Falco) (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-11-28 12:43:37 UTC
(In reply to comment #11)
> Falco, any news on this one?
> 

Donnie and all are right: we're probably not affected by this issue. I suggest to close this bug ("invalid")

Comment 13 Matt Drew (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-12-14 05:42:36 UTC
closing as invalid.