[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <5F48E626-4CD6-4477-B57D-80CF03348134@stufft.io>
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 03:10:24 -0400
From: Donald Stufft <donald@...fft.io>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com,
kseifried@...hat.com
Subject: Re: CVE Request: Insecure Software Download in pip
On Jul 27, 2013, at 3:08 AM, Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 07/25/2013 03:09 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> > I'd like to request a CVE for pip
> > (https://pypi.python.org/pypi/pip/).
> >
> > The mirroring support (-M, --use-mirrors) was implemented without
> > any sort of authenticity checks and is downloaded over plaintext
> > HTTP. Further more by default it will dynamically discover the list
> > of available mirrors by querying a DNS entry and extrapolating from
> > that data. It does not attempt to use any sort of method of
> > securing this querying of the DNS like DNSSEC. Software packages
> > are downloaded over these insecure links, unpacked, and then
> > typically the setup.py python file inside of them is executed.
> >
> > The vulnerable code is located at: -
> > https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/index.py#L60-L64 -
> > https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/index.py#L205-L207 -
> > https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/index.py#L553-L572 -
> > https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/index.py#L999-L1024
> >
> > The affected versions are every released version since 0.8.1 which
> > are: 0.8.1, 0.8.2, 0.8.3, 1.0, 1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.1, 1.2, 1.2.1, 1.3,
> > 1.3.1, 1.4
> >
> > I'm not aware of this issue having ever had a CVE requested for it
> > and my attempts to search the CVE database did not appear to turn
> > up anything relevant but the search doesn't appear to be the
> > greatest so I may have missed it.
> >
> > I'm hoping to land a patch for this in a future release (current
> > iteration of patch available at
> > https://github.com/dstufft/pip/compare/remove-mirror-support) but
> > there is no planned fix version as of yet.
> >
> > ----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B
> > 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
>
> Was it supposed to be secure (like was this explicitly supposed to be
> all encrypted/etc.)? This sounds more like security hardening than a
> security vulnerability.
>
> - --
> Kurt Seifried Red Hat Security Response Team (SRT)
> PGP: 0x5E267993 A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993
>
The mirroring protocol explicitly included provisions for verification which
was not being done.
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0381/#mirror-authenticity
-----------------
Donald Stufft
PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (842 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.
