[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E26E055.9000208@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:04:05 +0200
From: Jan Lieskovsky <jlieskov@...hat.com>
To: "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>
CC: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com, Josh Bressers <bressers@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: CVE requests; issues fixed in MySQL 5.1.52
Hello Steve,
since assuming lack of further information is the fact, which is
preventing CVE identifiers to be assigned to these issue, attached below
is the list of the issues from set, corrected in MySQL-v5.1.52 release,
which would be interesting from security point of view
(MySQL-v5.1.52-review.txt).
The rest of the v5.1.52 corrections does not seem to have security
implications.
Also, from the time, when MySQL-v5.1.52 has been released, couple of
newer versions has been released too:
1) http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/news-5-1-53.html
2) http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/news-5-1-54.html
3) http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/news-5-1-55.html
4) http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/news-5-1-55.html
5) http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/news-5-1-56.html
6) http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/news-5-1-57.html
And the two not released yet:
7) http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/news-5-1-58.html
8) http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/news-5-1-59.html
But prior requesting CVE ids for these, I will first review the lists
in 1) up to 8) and select only those, which might be interesting from
security point of view. Once the review is done, would attach another
similar review document, like the one attached below.
For now it would be sufficient if you could allocate CVE ids for
those v5.1.52 issues.
Hope this being helpful && Regards, Jan.
--
Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat Security Response Team
On 07/12/2011 08:27 PM, Josh Bressers wrote:
> Did these ever get IDs? I've been away and don't want to dupe these.
>
> Thanks.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> > Vincent Danen wrote:
>>> > > I see the following changes as fixed in MySQL 5.1.52, but cannot
>>> > > find
>>> > > any CVEs for them:
>>> > >
>>> > > InnoDB Storage Engine: Security Fix: Issuing TRUNCATE TABLE and
>>> > > examining the same table's information in the INFORMATION_SCHEMA
>>> > > database at the same time could cause a crash in the debug version
>>> > > of
>>> > > the server. (Bug #54678)
>>> > >
>>> > > Security Fix: The server crashed for assignment of values of types
>>> > > other
>>> > > than Geometry to items of type GeometryCollection (MultiPoint,
>>> > > MultiCurve, MultiSurface). Now the server checks the field type and
>>> > > fails with bad geometry value if it detects incorrect parameters.
>>> > > (Bug
>>> > > #55531)
>>> > >
>>> > > Security Fix: EXPLAIN EXTENDED caused a server crash with some
>>> > > prepared
>>> > > statements. (Bug #54494)
>>> > >
>>> > > Security Fix: In prepared-statement mode, EXPLAIN for a SELECT from
>>> > > a
>>> > > derived table caused a server crash. (Bug #54488)
>>> > >
>>> > > There are a whole bunch of other crash-type bugs corrected in 5.1.52
>>> > > that upstream did not explicitly flag as security, which might be
>>> > > considered security-relevant as well:
>>> > >
>>> > > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/news-5-1-52.html
>> >
>> > Looks like this CVE request got lost.
>> >
>> > cu
>> > Ludwig
>> >
>> > --
>> > (o_ Ludwig Nussel
>> > //\
>> > V_/_ http://www.suse.de/
>> > SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix
>> > Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
View attachment "MySQL-v5.1.52-review.txt" of type "text/plain" (9778 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
