From: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] openssl: update to 1.0.2i (CVE-2016-6304 and more)
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:01:39 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67fabe6e-fb01-7462-2e5e-8424d5d24571@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d96c9d2d55f4f6dcc78a51fadfb847711e89a09a.1474619763.git.patrick.ohly@intel.com>
On 09/23/2016 11:39 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> This update fixes several CVEs:
> * OCSP Status Request extension unbounded memory growth (CVE-2016-6304)
> * SWEET32 Mitigation (CVE-2016-2183)
> * OOB write in MDC2_Update() (CVE-2016-6303)
> * Malformed SHA512 ticket DoS (CVE-2016-6302)
> * OOB write in BN_bn2dec() (CVE-2016-2182)
> * OOB read in TS_OBJ_print_bio() (CVE-2016-2180)
> * DTLS buffered message DoS (CVE-2016-2179)
> * DTLS replay protection DoS (CVE-2016-2181)
> * Certificate message OOB reads (CVE-2016-6306)
>
> Of these, only CVE-2016-6304 is considered of high
> severity. Everything else is low. CVE-2016-2177 and CVE-2016-2178 were
> already fixed via local patches, which can be removed now.
This demonstrates that:
a) if CVEs are fixed with backported patches, the process must be
*thorough* and not shotgun-ish like now. It's pointless to fix some CVEs
and ignore the others, just because that's what automated tools like
cve-checker reported or someone saw some mail on a mailing list.
b) it's okay to not fix low-severity CVEs until the upstream makes a new
release. Upstream is much more competent than we are to judge that, and
if the issue is high severity, they should make a new release anyway.
Please feel free to disagree.
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-23 12:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-23 8:38 [PATCH 0/1] openssl: update to 1.0.2i (CVE-2016-6304 and more) Patrick Ohly
2016-09-23 8:39 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Patrick Ohly
2016-09-23 12:01 ` Alexander Kanavin [this message]
2016-09-23 16:25 ` akuster808
2016-09-26 12:36 ` Alexander Kanavin
2016-09-23 10:27 ` [PATCH 0/1] " Patrick Ohly
2016-09-23 12:11 ` Alexander Kanavin
2016-09-23 13:19 ` Patrick Ohly
2016-09-23 14:52 ` Alexander Kanavin
2016-09-23 13:26 ` [PATCHv2] " Patrick Ohly
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=67fabe6e-fb01-7462-2e5e-8424d5d24571@linux.intel.com \
--to=alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox