Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 864019 - app-misc/rpick: 'cargo audit' reports one or more bundled CRATES as vulnerable
Summary: app-misc/rpick: 'cargo audit' reports one or more bundled CRATES as vulnerable
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Security
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Vulnerabilities (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Security
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2022-08-06 15:29 UTC by Agostino Sarubbo
Modified: 2023-04-20 04:04 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

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


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Agostino Sarubbo gentoo-dev 2022-08-06 15:29:00 UTC
Dear maintainer(s),
'cargo audit' reports one or more bundled CRATES as vulnerable.
To reproduce please install dev-util/cargo-audit and run:
cargo audit --file Cargo.lock
where Cargo.lock is generated during the build of this package.

For simplicity, I'm attaching here the content of 'cargo audit' here:

      Loaded 433 security advisories (from /tmp/advisory-db)
    Scanning Cargo.lock for vulnerabilities (133 crate dependencies)
Crate:     regex
Version:   1.5.4
Title:     Regexes with large repetitions on empty sub-expressions take a very long time to parse
Date:      2022-03-08
ID:        RUSTSEC-2022-0013
URL:       https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2022-0013
Solution:  Upgrade to >=1.5.5
Dependency tree:
regex 1.5.4

Crate:     term
Version:   0.5.2
Warning:   unmaintained
Title:     term is looking for a new maintainer
Date:      2018-11-19
ID:        RUSTSEC-2018-0015
URL:       https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2018-0015
Dependency tree:
term 0.5.2

error: 1 vulnerability found!
warning: 1 allowed warning found
Comment 1 Randy Barlow 2023-04-03 21:44:37 UTC
As noted in https://github.com/Stebalien/term/issues/93, term isn't unmaintained, it just isn't getting new features anymore. Note also that https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2018-0015 says that >0.6.1 is "unaffected" (which is weird to me, how can something be unmaintained but also be unaffected with a newer version at the same time?). rpick-0.8.13 is currently in testing and has term-0.7.0. So we could consider this "fixed" by that version of rpick, but I would argue that there is no vulnerability here to begin with since the crate is not truly unmaintained.

As for regex, it is only used for tests as you can see here: https://github.com/bowlofeggs/rpick/blob/0.8.13/Cargo.toml. Also, both in-tree versions of rpick use a version of regex that is fixed.

Since I believe term isn't truly vulnerable, and since regex is only used for tests (and both versions of rpick in tree currently have the fix), I suggest we mark this ticket as fixed.

I don't actually have the permissions to set the status on this ticket, so someone else will need to do that if they agree with my assessment here.
Comment 2 John Helmert III archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2023-04-20 04:04:04 UTC
(In reply to Randy Barlow from comment #1)
> As noted in https://github.com/Stebalien/term/issues/93, term isn't
> unmaintained, it just isn't getting new features anymore. Note also that
> https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2018-0015 says that >0.6.1 is
> "unaffected" (which is weird to me, how can something be unmaintained but
> also be unaffected with a newer version at the same time?). rpick-0.8.13 is
> currently in testing and has term-0.7.0. So we could consider this "fixed"
> by that version of rpick, but I would argue that there is no vulnerability
> here to begin with since the crate is not truly unmaintained.
> 
> As for regex, it is only used for tests as you can see here:
> https://github.com/bowlofeggs/rpick/blob/0.8.13/Cargo.toml. Also, both
> in-tree versions of rpick use a version of regex that is fixed.
> 
> Since I believe term isn't truly vulnerable, and since regex is only used
> for tests (and both versions of rpick in tree currently have the fix), I
> suggest we mark this ticket as fixed.
> 
> I don't actually have the permissions to set the status on this ticket, so
> someone else will need to do that if they agree with my assessment here.

Plausible reason to presume a borderline spam bug report is fixed? Sure!