Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 603100 (CVE-2016-10009, CVE-2016-10010, CVE-2016-10011, CVE-2016-10012) - <net-misc/openssh-7.5_p1: Multiple Vulnerabilities
Summary: <net-misc/openssh-7.5_p1: Multiple Vulnerabilities
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: CVE-2016-10009, CVE-2016-10010, CVE-2016-10011, CVE-2016-10012
Product: Gentoo Security
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Vulnerabilities (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Security
URL: http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-sec...
Whiteboard: A4 [noglsa cve]
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2016-12-19 14:09 UTC by Agostino Sarubbo
Modified: 2017-10-26 01:41 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
=net-misc/openssh-7.5_p1-r1
Runtime testing required: ---
stable-bot: sanity-check+


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Agostino Sarubbo gentoo-dev 2016-12-19 14:09:42 UTC
From ${URL} :

Security
--------

 * ssh-agent(1): Will now refuse to load PKCS#11 modules from paths
   outside a trusted whitelist (run-time configurable). Requests to
   load modules could be passed via agent forwarding and an attacker
   could attempt to load a hostile PKCS#11 module across the forwarded
   agent channel: PKCS#11 modules are shared libraries, so this would
   result in code execution on the system running the ssh-agent if the
   attacker has control of the forwarded agent-socket (on the host
   running the sshd server) and the ability to write to the filesystem
   of the host running ssh-agent (usually the host running the ssh
   client). Reported by Jann Horn of Project Zero.

 * sshd(8): When privilege separation is disabled, forwarded Unix-
   domain sockets would be created by sshd(8) with the privileges of
   'root' instead of the authenticated user. This release refuses
   Unix-domain socket forwarding when privilege separation is disabled
   (Privilege separation has been enabled by default for 14 years).
   Reported by Jann Horn of Project Zero.

 * sshd(8): Avoid theoretical leak of host private key material to
   privilege-separated child processes via realloc() when reading
   keys. No such leak was observed in practice for normal-sized keys,
   nor does a leak to the child processes directly expose key material
   to unprivileged users. Reported by Jann Horn of Project Zero.
 
 * sshd(8): The shared memory manager used by pre-authentication
   compression support had a bounds checks that could be elided by
   some optimising compilers. Additionally, this memory manager was
   incorrectly accessible when pre-authentication compression was
   disabled. This could potentially allow attacks against the
   privileged monitor process from the sandboxed privilege-separation
   process (a compromise of the latter would be required first).
   This release removes support for pre-authentication compression
   from sshd(8). Reported by Guido Vranken using the Stack unstable
   optimisation identification tool (http://css.csail.mit.edu/stack/)

 * sshd(8): Fix denial-of-service condition where an attacker who
   sends multiple KEXINIT messages may consume up to 128MB per
   connection. Reported by Shi Lei of Gear Team, Qihoo 360.

 * sshd(8): Validate address ranges for AllowUser and DenyUsers
   directives at configuration load time and refuse to accept invalid
   ones. It was previously possible to specify invalid CIDR address
   ranges (e.g. user@....1.2.3/55) and these would always match,
   possibly resulting in granting access where it was not intended.
   Reported by Laurence Parry


@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 Thomas Deutschmann gentoo-dev Security 2016-12-19 14:32:01 UTC
I am not sure if we need this security bug. The only real security problem is CVE-2016-8858 which was already handled in bug 597360. At least no A3.
Comment 2 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2016-12-19 15:20:48 UTC
i'm working on the hpn update.  we'll see if x509 comes out soon (it usually does) before doing the bump.
Comment 3 Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) gentoo-dev 2016-12-19 16:13:12 UTC
(In reply to SpanKY from comment #2)
> i'm working on the hpn update.  we'll see if x509 comes out soon (it usually
> does) before doing the bump.

http://dev.gentoo.org/~polynomial-c/openssh-7.4p1-hpnssh14v12.tar.xz
Comment 4 Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) gentoo-dev 2016-12-19 16:21:03 UTC
(In reply to Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) from comment #3)
> (In reply to SpanKY from comment #2)
> > i'm working on the hpn update.  we'll see if x509 comes out soon (it usually
> > does) before doing the bump.
> 
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~polynomial-c/openssh-7.4p1-hpnssh14v12.tar.xz

Damn, screw it. I broke something :-(
Comment 5 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2016-12-19 19:50:07 UTC
(In reply to Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) from comment #4)

don't worry about it ... i need to do the rebase anyways to push to the upstream hpn git repo
Comment 6 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2016-12-22 07:41:53 UTC
i've pushed out my 7.4p1 updates, sans hpn.  hitting interop test failures again like we were with 7.2p1.  i don't think we ever tracked down those issues, they just seemed to go away with 7.3p1.
Comment 7 Denis Dupeyron gentoo-dev 2016-12-25 15:30:18 UTC
Mike,

It doesn't build with USE=X509. Without it, it does.

Here's the error:

In file included from ssh.c:123:0:
ssh.c: In function ‘main’:
version.h:5:46: error: expected ‘)’ before ‘SSH_X509’
 #define SSH_RELEASE SSH_VERSION SSH_PORTABLE SSH_X509
                                              ^
ssh.c:807:8: note: in expansion of macro ‘SSH_RELEASE’
        SSH_RELEASE,
        ^~~~~~~~~~~
ssh.c:806:26: warning: format ‘%s’ expects a matching ‘char *’ argument [-Wformat=]
    fprintf(stderr, "%s, %s\n",
                          ^
In file included from ssh.c:123:0:
version.h:5:46: error: expected ‘)’ before ‘SSH_X509’
 #define SSH_RELEASE SSH_VERSION SSH_PORTABLE SSH_X509
                                              ^
ssh.c:1064:19: note: in expansion of macro ‘SSH_RELEASE’
   logit("%s, %s", SSH_RELEASE,
                   ^~~~~~~~~~~
ssh.c:1064:15: warning: format ‘%s’ expects a matching ‘char *’ argument [-Wformat=]
   logit("%s, %s", SSH_RELEASE,
               ^

I'm using gcc-6.2 in case it matters.

Thanks,
Calchan.
Comment 8 Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) gentoo-dev 2016-12-25 15:33:07 UTC
(In reply to Denis Dupeyron from comment #7)
> 
> It doesn't build with USE=X509. Without it, it does.
> 

See bug #603610
Comment 9 Denis Dupeyron gentoo-dev 2016-12-25 17:28:39 UTC
Mike, for some reason unknown to me, in version.h putting SSH_X509 on it own #define line works.
Comment 10 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2016-12-26 18:48:15 UTC
(In reply to Denis Dupeyron from comment #7)

should be fixed by:
  https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=c4f141d88c8d955ecbe86554ef21892b0aec762a
Comment 11 Thomas Deutschmann gentoo-dev Security 2017-01-08 23:21:42 UTC
@ Maintainer(s): While most issues form 7.4 changelog should be already addressed in our 7.3 versions please tell us if we are ready to start stabilization of =net-misc/openssh-7.4_p1 or how you would like to proceed.
Comment 12 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2017-03-20 19:05:37 UTC
7.5p1 is in the tree now w/hpn patchset since it is passing tests for me.  i guess give it a few weeks and we can stabilize that.  haven't heard of any other 7.4p1 regressions.
Comment 13 Yury German Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2017-03-24 07:11:00 UTC
Note CVE's have only been filed up to 7.4.1_p1 (7.5 and 7.5.1 CVE's to be added at a later time).
Comment 14 Patrick McLean gentoo-dev 2017-03-27 22:22:29 UTC
7.5p1-r1 is now in the tree with the updated X509 patch, it passes tests with both just X509 and X509+hpn
Comment 15 Yury German Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2017-03-28 02:47:58 UTC
Maintainer(s), please advise if you are ready for stabilization or call for stabilization yourself.
Comment 16 Yury German Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2017-04-30 17:16:02 UTC
Checked on bugs .. does not look like any. Are we ready for it now?
Comment 17 Yury German Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2017-06-03 06:34:17 UTC
We have been holding on to this vulnerability for a few months? are you ready for stabilization?
Comment 18 Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) gentoo-dev 2017-06-09 09:02:00 UTC
Arches please test and mark stable =net-misc/openssh-7.5_p1-r1 with target KEYWORDS:

alpha amd64 arm ~arm64 hppa ia64 ~m68k ~mips ppc ppc64 ~s390 ~sh sparc x86 ~ppc-aix ~amd64-fbsd ~sparc-fbsd ~x86-fbsd ~amd64-linux ~arm-linux ~x86-linux ~ppc-macos ~x64-macos ~x86-macos ~m68k-mint ~sparc-solaris ~sparc64-solaris ~x64-solaris ~x86-solaris
Comment 19 Agostino Sarubbo gentoo-dev 2017-06-09 10:19:59 UTC
x86 stable
Comment 20 Agostino Sarubbo gentoo-dev 2017-06-09 12:42:02 UTC
amd64 stable
Comment 21 Agostino Sarubbo gentoo-dev 2017-06-10 13:45:23 UTC
sparc stable
Comment 22 Agostino Sarubbo gentoo-dev 2017-06-10 15:11:23 UTC
ia64 stable
Comment 23 Agostino Sarubbo gentoo-dev 2017-06-13 12:31:54 UTC
ppc64 stable
Comment 24 Markus Meier gentoo-dev 2017-06-13 18:24:22 UTC
arm stable
Comment 25 Tobias Klausmann gentoo-dev 2017-06-20 15:01:07 UTC
Stable on alpha.
Comment 26 Agostino Sarubbo gentoo-dev 2017-06-21 11:57:36 UTC
ppc stable
Comment 27 Christopher Díaz Riveros (RETIRED) gentoo-dev Security 2017-08-16 14:53:35 UTC
Arches, please finish stabilizing hppa

Gentoo Security Padawan
ChrisADR
Comment 28 Sergei Trofimovich gentoo-dev 2017-09-26 22:18:32 UTC
hppa stable
Comment 29 Aaron Bauman Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2017-10-26 01:41:22 UTC
(In reply to Thomas Deutschmann from comment #1)
> I am not sure if we need this security bug. The only real security problem
> is CVE-2016-8858 which was already handled in bug 597360. At least no A3.

Agreed.

Tree is clean.

GLSA Vote: No