[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <52F4A6A6020000780011A10D@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 08:25:58 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: <cve-assign@...re.org>
Cc: <oss-security@...ts.openwall.com>,<security@....org>
Subject: Re: Xen Security Advisory 84 - integer overflow in several
XSM/Flask hypercalls
>>> On 06.02.14 at 18:23, <cve-assign@...re.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> We can provide the three CVE assignments for XSA-84 (as well as the
> one CVE assignment for XSA-85 and the one CVE assignment for XSA-86).
> However, could you please clarify:
>
>> http://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-84.html
>
>> UPDATES IN VERSION 2
>> ====================
>>
>> Public release.
>>
>> The patch for 4.1 was extended to cover a few further similar issues.
>
> Here, was the original scope of "The patch for 4.1" (before it was
> extended) exclusively:
>
> "a different overflow issue on FLASK_{GET,SET}BOOL and expose
> unreasonably large memory allocation to arbitrary guests"
>
> ? Or do you mean that, originally, the "patch for 4.1" addressed
> another vulnerability, and this "different overflow issue" was one of
> the version-2 extensions to the scope of XSA-84?
The original patch was dealing with just the unbounded memory
allocation. The missing bounds checking was what the incremental
addition dealt with.
Jan
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.
