Bug List: (This bug is not in your last search results)   Show last search results      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 190667
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: Gentoo Security <security@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Pierre-Yves Rofes <py@gentoo.org>
Add CC:
CC:
Remove selected CCs
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Flags: Requestee:
 
 
  ()

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
bitchx-1.1-p_mode-overflow.patch fix for the p_mode overflow patch Pierre-Yves Rofes 2007-09-25 08:59 0000 440 bytes Details | Diff
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 190667 depends on: Show dependency tree
Bug 190667 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: 2007-08-29 16:27 0000
bannedit has reported a vulnerability in BitchX, which can potentially be
exploited by malicious people to compromise a user's system.

The vulnerability is caused due to a boundary error when handling IRC MODE
messages. This can be exploited to cause a buffer overflow by sending a MODE
message with an overly long parameter to an affected IRC client.

Successful exploitation may allow the execution of arbitrary code, but requires
that the user is tricked into connecting to a malicious server.

The vulnerability is reported in BitchX 1.1. Other versions may also be
affected.

Solution:
Do not connect to untrusted IRC servers.

------- Comment #1 From Pierre-Yves Rofes 2007-08-29 16:29:15 0000 -------
setting status, and waiting for upstream to provide a fix.

------- Comment #2 From Robert Buchholz 2007-09-23 13:41:01 0000 -------
This is CVE-2007-4584.

------- Comment #3 From Pierre-Yves Rofes 2007-09-24 18:48:38 0000 -------
Hmm, what's the status here? jokey talked of masking it few days ago, but
lu_zero you wanted to keep it since you fixed the last security issue (bug
183149). So what do we do now? 

------- Comment #4 From Luca Barbato 2007-09-24 23:03:43 0000 -------
keep it please.

------- Comment #5 From Pierre-Yves Rofes 2007-09-25 08:59:57 0000 -------
Created an attachment (id=131832) [details]
fix for the p_mode overflow

Here's a proposed fix. But:
1) could someone confirm that my fix is correct and complete? I don't want to
screw up like last time with eggdrop. bannedit, since you wrote the exploit,
maybe you can?
2) There's good chances that bitchx contains other vulnerabilities, this is old
unmaintained code (generates lots of warnings when compiling it).
In the end, I don't know if it really is a good idea to keep it. lu_zero,
unless you *really* want to keep this, in which case I guess you should become
the maintainer, I think we should just p.mask the thing. 

------- Comment #6 From Robert Buchholz 2007-10-09 22:31:06 0000 -------
According to nion from Debian who reviewed this patch, it does not fix all the
issues. His tries at fixing this were unsuccessful, too:
 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=443544

Lu, please advise.

------- Comment #7 From Robert Buchholz 2007-11-05 00:56:12 0000 -------
I'd recommend to mask and possibly last-rite it afterwards, since it does not
look like this issue will be resolved by anyone.

------- Comment #8 From Luca Barbato 2007-11-05 15:40:51 0000 -------
Sorry, I'm back alive, I'd p.mask the package for now. I do not have time to
check  if the fix is ok, bx sadly it's quite good for a number of people and I
couldn't find valid replacements yet.

------- Comment #9 From Robert Buchholz 2007-11-05 18:52:22 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> Sorry, I'm back alive, I'd p.mask the package for now. I do not have time to
> check  if the fix is ok, bx sadly it's quite good for a number of people and I
> couldn't find valid replacements yet.

Nion reviewed the patch and the bx code and did not find an appropriate fix yet
and I did not see anyone but him and us struggling with the package any more.
Please p.mask for now or deal with the unfortunate task of doing the upstream
work here.

------- Comment #10 From Robert Buchholz 2007-11-06 03:41:21 0000 -------
Another issue just popped up.


Secunia -- BitchX "e_hostname()" Insecure Temporary File Creation:
A security issue has been reported in BitchX, which can be exploited by
malicious, local users to perform certain actions with escalated privileges.

The security issue is caused due to the "e_hostname()" function creating a
temporary file insecurely using the "tmpnam()" function when the user issues
the "HOSTNAME" or the "IRCHOST" command. This can be exploited to overwrite
arbitrary files on the local system with the privileges of the user running
BitchX.

http://secunia.com/advisories/27463/

------- Comment #11 From Pierre-Yves Rofes 2008-02-14 22:32:29 0000 -------
net-irc/lu_zero, could you please p.mask this until we have a fix?

------- Comment #12 From Pierre-Yves Rofes 2008-03-04 22:51:16 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #11)
> net-irc/lu_zero, could you please p.mask this until we have a fix?
> 

*ping*

------- Comment #13 From Matthias Geerdsen 2008-07-07 18:30:35 0000 -------
net-irc/lu_zero please mask it, as I don't think a patch which suddenly
appeared

This long of a delay is actually not acceptable.

------- Comment #14 From Markus Ullmann 2008-07-07 21:31:40 0000 -------
Package is masked now, sorry for the delay

------- Comment #15 From Matthias Geerdsen 2008-07-07 22:27:45 0000 -------
Danke Markus.

We need a mask glsa for this one; request filed.

------- Comment #16 From Pierre-Yves Rofes 2008-07-21 22:07:12 0000 -------
GLSA 200807-12, sorry for the delay

Bug List: (This bug is not in your last search results)   Show last search results      Search page      Enter new bug