First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 34294
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: Gentoo Security <security@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) <lcars@gentoo.org>
Add CC:
CC:
Remove selected CCs
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Flags: Requestee:
 
 
  ()

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
iproute2-2.4.7-netlink.patch iproute netlink security patch patch Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2003-11-24 15:26 0000 666 bytes Details | Diff
iproute-20010824-r5.ebuild updated ebuild text/plain Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2004-04-06 07:18 0000 2.27 KB Details
iproute-netlink-spoof.patch filesdir patch patch Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2004-04-06 07:19 0000 666 bytes Details | Diff
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 34294 depends on: Show dependency tree
Bug 34294 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: 2003-11-24 15:25 0000 
From RedHat advisory:

Herbert Xu reported that iproute can accept spoofed messages sent on the
kernel netlink interface by other users on the local machine.  This could
lead to a local denial of service attack.  The Common Vulnerabilities and
Exposures project (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the name CAN-2003-0856 to
this issue.

I'm attaching the RedHat patch.

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

------- Comment #1 From Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2003-11-24 15:26:20 0000 ------- 
Created an attachment (id=21221) [details]
iproute netlink security patch

------- Comment #2 From solar 2003-12-10 15:09:48 0000 ------- 
Andrea,
Pleae add this patch to iproute if it's needed and package mask older versions.
Also please inform arch herds if they need to mark stable where applicable.

------- Comment #3 From Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2004-03-30 04:25:03 0000 ------- 
Unfortunately this bug is really old, I'll handle it this week.

------- Comment #4 From Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2004-04-06 07:17:22 0000 ------- 
This bug was apparently acknowledged only by RedHat, I'm attaching an updated
ebuild + patch. I've tested it and it works fine. Could someone review this and
commit the update?

Anyway I don't think that we need a GLSA for this.

------- Comment #5 From Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2004-04-06 07:18:41 0000 ------- 
Created an attachment (id=28787) [details]
updated ebuild

------- Comment #6 From Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2004-04-06 07:19:53 0000 ------- 
Created an attachment (id=28788) [details]
filesdir patch

------- Comment #7 From SpanKY 2004-04-06 08:11:34 0000 ------- 
added the patch to iproute-20010824-r5

------- Comment #8 From Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2004-04-06 15:29:20 0000 ------- 
Thanks vapier.  Please everybody test the new ebuild and mark it stable when
ready.

------- Comment #9 From SpanKY 2004-04-06 15:39:51 0000 ------- 
when building against 2.4 headers we see Bug 46978 ... i'm tracking it down now

------- Comment #10 From SpanKY 2004-04-06 21:02:28 0000 ------- 
Bug 46978 has been squashed so we can start pushing at arch maintainers ...

i tested it on my x86/hppa/mips/sparc and they all worked ...

could someone from ppc/alpha/amd64 test -r5 and make sure it's happy please ?

------- Comment #11 From Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2004-04-06 23:16:09 0000 ------- 
Works fine for me on ppc.

------- Comment #12 From Bryan Østergaard (RETIRED) 2004-04-07 03:12:06 0000 ------- 
Works fine on alpha.

------- Comment #13 From Jon Portnoy (RETIRED) 2004-04-07 07:13:56 0000 ------- 
Stable on AMD64.

------- Comment #14 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2004-04-07 08:20:43 0000 ------- 
OK so we're ready for a GLSA, if one is needed. Changing product/component.

-K

------- Comment #15 From Andrea Barisani (RETIRED) 2004-04-07 08:40:02 0000 ------- 
It's still marked unstable on ppc and alpha. btw I vote against a GLSA, any
comments?

------- Comment #16 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2004-04-07 08:51:55 0000 ------- 
Setting component to Security as this is a vulnerability.

------- Comment #17 From Bryan Østergaard (RETIRED) 2004-04-07 10:48:37 0000 ------- 
Marked stable on Alpha.

------- Comment #18 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2004-04-07 13:04:14 0000 ------- 
The vuln is 5 month-old and not very severe (DoS by very determined local
users, only on systems having iproute installed). I also vote against a GLSA
for this one.

-K

------- Comment #19 From SpanKY 2004-04-07 15:57:46 0000 ------- 
it's your call daddy-o

------- Comment #20 From Kurt Lieber 2004-04-08 01:14:55 0000 ------- 
the bug may be old, but our arches were still vulnerable to it until just a
couple days ago.  Thus, I think we need to issue a GLSA for this one.

------- Comment #21 From solar 2004-04-08 01:19:42 0000 ------- 
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0856
As of now it's still currently under review and has no votes. 
Is anybody aware of any other vendors doing a sec announcements for this?

------- Comment #22 From Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2004-04-09 06:01:25 0000 ------- 
GLSA 200404-10 published.

------- Comment #23 From SpanKY 2004-04-18 22:04:57 0000 ------- 
*** Bug 48290 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug