[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E7EF1CA.5030603@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 02:18:02 -0700
From: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@...arcrm.com>
To: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@...il.com>
CC: Vincent Danen <vdanen@...hat.com>,
"oss-security@...ts.openwall.com" <oss-security@...ts.openwall.com>,
"security@....net" <security@....net>
Subject: Re: CVE request: is_a() function may allow arbitrary code execution
in PHP 5.3.7/5.3.8
Hi!
On 9/25/11 2:02 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> I tend to disagree here. One of the CVE goal is not about declaring
> one or the other guilty of bad practice(s) but about informing users
> about security issues in the software they use and how to act
> correctly to fix these issues.
>
> The is_a change is typically one of these security issues. While being
> a minor one (recommended ini settings or good code practices would
> avoid it easily), it is still one. That's why I'd to go with assigning
> one and link it to the bug.
I'm concerned that if we do it this way people would take it as "PHP has
security bug in is_a and it was fixed in this version, so as long as we
run updated version we're OK", not "my code has gaping security hole
which by pure luck wasn't exploitable but minor change made it
exploitable". If we don't make it crystal clear the latter and not the
former is the case, we'd have same problem with 5.4.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 227
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.
