[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <mpro.lv6ar0065ew5s081n.taviso@cmpxchg8b.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 17:21:01 +0100
From: Tavis Ormandy <taviso@...xchg8b.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Please REJECT CVE-2011-4112
Petr Matousek <pmatouse@...hat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> could you please reject CVE-2011-4112 as it is not a security bug.
>
> Reference: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751006#c5
>
> Thank you,
Unrelated, but if it did not require CAP_NET_ADMIN, would you have
considered it a security bug?
I was under the impression that there was general agreement that NULL derefs
that are handled gracefully are not security bugs any more.
Is this because you're setting panic_on_oops?
I wonder if we should create a separate panic_on_null, as I agree
panic_on_oops is probably the correct default so as to avoid transitioning
into a potentially exploitable state. I think I'm reasonably confident in
the handling of NULL derefs (or am I deluded? I havn't thought about it a
great deal).
Tavis.
--
-------------------------------------
taviso@...xchg8b.com | pgp encrypted mail preferred
-------------------------------------------------------
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.
