[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54EAF367.4030806@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:31:19 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Jean-Baptiste Kempf <jb@...eolan.org>
CC: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com,
Assign a CVE Identifier <cve-assign@...re.org>,
VideoLAN Security Team <security@...eolan.org>
Subject: Re: CVE request: BD-J implementation in libbluray
On 02/23/2015 10:27 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> On 23 Feb, Florian Weimer wrote :
>> Missing Java Security Manager sandboxing mechanism / feature in the
>> org.videolan.BDJLoader class
>
> The code corresponding to:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=959433
>
> is gone from newer release. You should upgrade, since we don't support
> old releases.
Still needs CVE assignment, though.
> As for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=959434
>
> "Fixing it would not change anything. Xlet (that requests the mount, or is
> being executed from the mount) could as well uncompress the files by self
> where it wants, even download other files from internet."
>
> So, maybe you want to have a full Xlet sandboxing? Or is it something
> else?
Yes, I do think full sandboxing is required because content publishers
have attacked end user system integrity in the past, so I don't think
they can be trusted.
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security
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.
