Bug 183520 - net-analyzer/wireshark < 0.99.6 multiple vulnerabilities (CVE-2007-3389, 3390, 3391, 3392, 3393)
|
Bug#:
183520
|
Product: Gentoo Linux
|
Version: unspecified
|
Platform: All
|
|
OS/Version: Linux
|
Status: RESOLVED
|
Severity: normal
|
Priority: P2
|
|
Resolution: FIXED
|
Assigned To: security@gentoo.org
|
Reported By: chainsaw@gentoo.org
|
|
Component: Security
|
|
|
URL:
http://www.wireshark.org/docs/relnotes/wireshark-0.99.6.html
|
|
Summary: net-analyzer/wireshark < 0.99.6 multiple vulnerabilities (CVE-2007-3389, 3390, 3391, 3392, 3393)
|
|
Keywords:
|
|
Status Whiteboard: B? [glsa]
|
|
Opened: 2007-06-28 13:21 0000
|
#
Wireshark could crash when dissecting an HTTP chunked response. (Bug 1394)
Versions affected: 0.99.5
#
On some systems, Wireshark could crash while reading iSeries capture files.
(Bug 1415)
Versions affected: 0.10.14 to 0.99.5
#
Wireshark could exhaust system memory while reading a malformed DCP ETSI
packet. (Bug 1264)
Versions affected: 0.99.5
#
Wireshark could loop excessively while reading a malformed SSL packet. (Bug
1582)
Versions affected: ?
#
The DHCP/BOOTP dissector was susceptible to an off-by-one error. (Bug 1416)
Versions affected: ?
#
Wireshark could loop excessively while reading a malformed MMS packet. (Bug
1382)
Versions affected: ?
*** Bug 183521 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
no reason to restrict this bug
netmon please advise and patch as necessary.
Bumped in CVS though I'd be happy for another pair of eyes first if all
security issues are really fixed...
Seems like mostly minor issues. Anyways.
Arches please test and mark stable. Target keywords are:
wireshark-0.99.6.ebuild:KEYWORDS="alpha amd64 hppa ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86
~x86-fbsd"
pva has the patch for the --as-needed failure...so we could wait until he adds
it...
Back to ebuild awaiting patch.
(In reply to comment #7)
> Back to ebuild awaiting patch.
>
I've just fixed the issue with asneeded so it should be ok to proceed.
ppc stable - time for glsa voting
although it's mainly minor issues like Jaervosz pointed out, there's still the
off-by-one error, which means possible remote code execution, so I vote YES.
Two yes votes = glsa request.
CVE-2007-3389
CVE-2007-3390
CVE-2007-3391
CVE-2007-3392
CVE-2007-3393