Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 233563 (CVE-2008-3429) - www-client/httrack <3.42.3 URI processing buffer overflow (CVE-2008-3429)
Summary: www-client/httrack <3.42.3 URI processing buffer overflow (CVE-2008-3429)
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: CVE-2008-3429
Product: Gentoo Security
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Vulnerabilities (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Security
URL: http://secunia.com/advisories/31323/
Whiteboard: C2 [noglsa]
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-08-01 08:59 UTC by Robert Buchholz (RETIRED)
Modified: 2008-09-06 20:51 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 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-01 08:59:51 UTC
CVE-2008-3429 (http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2008-3429):
  Buffer overflow in URI processing in HTTrack and WinHTTrack before 3.42-3
  allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) and possibly
  execute arbitrary code via a long URL.
Comment 1 Marcelo Goes (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-01 18:13:11 UTC
Feel free to bump it if I don't get it first.
- Marcelo
Comment 2 Marcelo Goes (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-03 21:29:08 UTC
Bumped in cvs.
Comment 3 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-03 21:43:12 UTC
Arches, please test and mark stable:
=www-client/httrack-3.42.3
Target keywords : "amd64 ppc sparc x86"
Comment 4 Raúl Porcel (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-04 16:50:08 UTC
sparc/x86 stable
Comment 5 Tobias Heinlein (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-04 17:10:50 UTC
amd64 stable
Comment 6 Raphael Marichez (Falco) (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-06 16:56:54 UTC
Note @security: if i understand well, it's a "command-line" buffer overflow vulnerability, i.e. a bof triggered by a long URL as a parameter of the command-line, thus not remotely triggerable. Thus there is no security impact since the user voluntarily enters a clearly erroneous URI.
Comment 7 Christian Hoffmann (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-06 17:45:41 UTC
What about an external program/script which spawns httrack in the background? It might take a user-supplied URL and pass it to httrack (which is probably a valid use case)...
Comment 8 Raphael Marichez (Falco) (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-07 07:52:33 UTC
(In reply to comment #7)
> What about an external program/script which spawns httrack in the background?
> It might take a user-supplied URL and pass it to httrack (which is probably a
> valid use case)...
> 

In that case too, the user would himself supply a strange URL to his script, it's not a remotely exploitable overflow. If the user trusts something like "http://foo.bar/AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA%33%44%55%whatever", i suspect he would also trust any kind of URL, even containg ';' or back-quotes ``, and he can be fooled with any sort of shell injection code.

There used to be a lot of command-line buffer overflows (or format-string vulns) and we usually don't handle this as a security issue.


See http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91737#c2 and http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91737#c21 for example

Any other inputs?
Comment 9 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-07 21:06:28 UTC
As far as automated systems go, they might properly pass the URL to the program (see python's spawn* methods), so no metacharacter issue there. On the other hand I follow your logic of very little exploitation vector. Since I don't want to leave this ebuild with inconsistent stable versions, let's leave it open for PPC to stable, rerate it C3 and agree on a NO / close INVALID.
Comment 10 Tobias Scherbaum (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-08 20:21:58 UTC
ppc stable
Comment 11 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-15 14:29:20 UTC
I vote NO for a GLSA.