Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 490240 - net-fs/samba : no access check verification on stream files
Summary: net-fs/samba : no access check verification on stream files
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 491070
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Security
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Vulnerabilities (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal minor (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Security
URL: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug....
Whiteboard: B3 [upstream/ebuild]
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-11-03 09:27 UTC by Agostino Sarubbo
Modified: 2014-01-13 17:39 UTC (History)
1 user (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 2013-11-03 09:27:05 UTC
From ${URL} :

It was reported [1] that there are no ACL checks done on accessing stream files (as opposed to 
regular files) when performing generic file operations like read and write.  A stream file created 
on a CIFS share, with explicit deny write ACE applied, would be ignored, despite the access 
control.  This could allow users able to access the CIFS share on which such a restricted stream 
file existed, to read and write to the stream file when the expectation was that they were not 
authorized to do so.

A patch has been posted to the samba-technical mailing list [2] to correct this flaw.  Samba 3.6 
and higher are affected by this flaw.

[1] https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10235
[2] https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20131028/3f1fc04c/attachment.patch


@maintainer(s): after the bump, in case we need to stabilize the package, please let us know if it is ready for the stabilization or not.
Comment 1 Chris Reffett (RETIRED) gentoo-dev Security 2013-12-09 01:53:08 UTC
@maintainers: ping.
Comment 2 Agostino Sarubbo gentoo-dev 2014-01-13 17:39:12 UTC
Seems that was handled in bug 491070

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 491070 ***