On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 05:22:59PM +0200, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> * Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-16 17:00]:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 04:14:48PM +0200, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > wrote:
> > > note that CVE-2008-2785 has been fixed with the 3.0.1-1 
> > > upload referring to the upstream security advisory on
> > > http://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/2008/mfsa2008-34.html
> > 
> > Note that 3.0.1-1 was uploaded before the upstream security advisory
> > was released, so it doesn't refer to the MFSA or CVE numbers.
> 
> Yes sure.
> 
> > Also note that technically, these bugs affect the xulrunner-1.9 package,
> > not the iceweasel package. But iceweasel 3.0.1-1 depending on xulrunner-1.9
> > >> 1.9~rc2-5, and 1.9.0.1-1 being next after 1.9~rc2-5, this is roughly the
> > same (except for epiphany and friends, but the BTS is surely not the
> > best place to keep proper security fix versioning, security-tracker should
> > be)
> 
> Ok thanks, added xulrunner 1.9.0.1-1 to the list of fixed 
> packages at the security-tracker.
> 
> > > Unfortunately it is not yet clear whether CVE-2008-2786 is 
> > > the same issue or not.
> > 
> > There are two fixes in the diff between 3.0 and 3.0.1 that look like
> > overflow fixing, and that are very similar:
> > one in layout/style/nsCSSValue.h and one in
> > rdf/base/src/nsInMemoryDataSource.cpp.
> > 
> > Maybe each CVE refers to each of these.
> > 
> > There is also a crash bug that is fixed, but MFSA-2008-24 explicitely
> > talks about CVE-2008-2785, so this leaves only CVE-2008-2786 as unexplained,
> > and CVE-2008-2786 is about a buffer overflow, which is not what the fixed
> > crash seems to lead to, I'd say. This crash is:
> > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=440473
> > 
> > Note that if that were really CVE-2008-2786, it would not be a public bug.
> > 
> > So it looks pretty much like both are fixed. If you don't agree, feel
> > free to reopen.
> 
> I reopen this bug for now as there is not clear evidence 
> about what CVE-2008-2786 is as long as the researcher who 
> posted the hashes on full-disclosure comes up with the 
> details. I'm not even sure if he informed the mozilla people 
> about the vulnerability.
> 
> I suggest cloning this bug, assigning one to CVE-2008-2786 
> and one to CVE-2008-2785, closing the latter one and tagging 
> the first one with moreinfo.
> 
> What do you think?

Go ahead. You may want to reassign to xulrunner-1.9 at the same time.
(and maybe clone for iceweasel and iceape in stable, and iceape in unstable,
1.1.11 will fix CVE-2008-2785)

Mike



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to