Bugzilla Bug 181385

Some vulnerabilities have been reported in Webmin, which can be exploited by
malicious people to conduct cross-site scripting attacks.

Input passed to unspecified parameters in pam_login.cgi is not properly
sanitised before being returned to the user. This can be exploited to execute
arbitrary HTML and script code in a user's browser session in context of an
affected site.

The vulnerabilities are reported in version 1.340. Prior versions may also be
affected.

Solution:
Update to version 1.350.

Provided and/or discovered by:
Reported by the vendor.

Setting status and cc'ing maintainer. please advise and bump as necessary.

*** Bug 180607 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

beu's being retired... I'm adding armin76 to CC, since he did the last security
bump.

1.350 in the tree

Thanks Raul.
Arches, please test and mark stable. Target keywords are:
webmin-1.350.ebuild:KEYWORDS="alpha amd64 arm hppa ppc ppc64 s390 sh sparc x86"

ppc64 stable

Stable for HPPA.

alpha/x86 stable

ppc stable

sparc stable.

amd64 done

I tend to vote YES.

I tend to vote yes too.

In order to stealth (and use) the victim's cookies, an attacker has to:
- have access to the webmin interface (which i think is highly insecure)
- bring the victim to a crafted, malicious URL.

Usually i vote no, but given that a webmin credentials compromise is likely to
lead to a complete system compromise, i will vote yes. I still think running
webmin over internet is silly.

usermin is certainly affected too, since the pam_login.cgi file is exactly the
same one.
(between vulnerable webmin-1.340 and usermin-1.270)

Raul could you handle this (patch or bump as necessary), thanks in advance.

app-admin/usermin-1.280 in the tree

Thx Raul.
Arches, please test and mark stable usermin-1.280. Target keywords are:
usermin-1.280:KEYWORDS="alpha amd64 hppa ppc ppc64 sparc x86"

hppa done.

alpha/x86 stable

amd64 done

sparc stable.

ppc64 stable

ppc stable, ready for glsa voting.

thanks Tobias, but we already voted previously :)

(In reply to comment #24)
> thanks Tobias, but we already voted previously :)
> 

nevermind then :P

GLSA 200707-05