From: Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot <buildroot@buildroot.org>
To: nvd@nist.gov
Cc: "buildroot@buildroot.org" <buildroot@buildroot.org>
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] CVE-2018-11574 version range fix
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2023 22:59:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230908225938.249f3ff6@windsurf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230903000100.0c1b187b@windsurf>
Hello,
Gentle ping on the below bug report. Thanks!
Thomas Petazzoni
On Sun, 3 Sep 2023 00:01:00 +0200
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> CVE-2018-11574 is marked in the NVD database as affecting all pppd
> versions, as it has as its only "Configuration" the following CPE
> identifier match:
>
> cpe:2.3:a:point-to-point_protocol_project:point-to-point_protocol:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
>
> However, it turns out that the upstream pppd was *never* affected by
> CVE-2018-11574. Let me walk through the story.
>
> CVE-2018-11574 affects the EAP-TLS implementation in pppd. However,
> EAP-TLS was not supported in upstream pppd before its 2.4.9 release,
> thanks to commit
> https://github.com/ppp-project/ppp/commit/e87fe1bbd37a1486c5223f110e9ce3ef75971f93.
>
> Before that EAP-TLS support for pppd was provided as an out-of-tree
> patch, provided by a third party developer at
> https://jjkeijser.github.io/ppp/download.html. It is this patch that
> was affected by CVE-2018-11574. As can be seen at
> https://jjkeijser.github.io/ppp/download.html, all versions of the
> patch prior to version 1.101 are affected, as 1.101 was precisely
> released to fix CVE-2018-11574.
>
> So: before pppd 2.4.9, the only way to be affected by CVE-2018-11574
> was by having applied a third-party patch. I am not sure how to reflect
> this correctly in the CVE-2018-11574 information in the NVD database.
> To me, if one applies random patches to a code base, for sure those
> patches can introduce additional security vulnerabilities, so it
> doesn't make sense that CVE-2018-11574 is reported against pppd
> upstream.
>
> In addition, in the EAP-TLS code that was added in pppd 2.4.9, the
> issue of CVE-2018-11574 is already fixed. Indeed, we did a diff between
> the out-of-tree EAP-TLS patch in version 0.999 (affected) and 1.101
> (not affected), which gives the attached file. And those fixes are
> indeed present in commit
> https://github.com/ppp-project/ppp/commit/e87fe1bbd37a1486c5223f110e9ce3ef75971f93,
> which introduced EAP-TLS support in upstream pppd.
>
> Therefore: upstream pppd was never affected by this issue. Prior to
> pppd 2.4.9, there was no EAP-TLS support, and starting from 2.4.9, the
> EAP-TLS is correct with regard to CVE-2018-11574.
>
> At the very least, I would suggest to change the CVE-2018-11574
> information to indicate that only versions up to (and excluding) 2.4.9
> are affected. Do you think this would be possible ?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-08 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-02 22:01 [Buildroot] CVE-2018-11574 version range fix Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot
2023-09-08 20:59 ` Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230908225938.249f3ff6@windsurf \
--to=buildroot@buildroot.org \
--cc=nvd@nist.gov \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.