Le 16/10/2016 à 17:47, Alex Vong a écrit : > Hello, > > I notice the patch for CVE-2016-7977[0] handles the problem differently > than GNU Ghostscript[1] does. Maybe you can take a look at it. > > [0]: > http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.git;a=commitdiff;h=8abd22010eb4db0fb1b10e430d5f5d83e015ef70 > [1]: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/ghostscript.git/tree/psi/zfile.c > > Thanks, > Alex
Hello, I've just released a gnu-ghostscript point release with the CVE patches adapted by Mark (really thanks !!!). For the CVE-2016-7977 I've see that the file concerned was modified in later release of gpl-ghostscript, I will see in later release of gnu version ;) Best regards Didier > > Didier Link <did...@famille-link.fr> writes: > >> Hello all >> >> I will review the Mark's patches and apply them for a security release next >> week. >> >> Thanks for your help ! >> >> Best regards >> >> Didier >> >> Le 15/10/2016 à 09:36, Mark H Weaver a écrit : >> >> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> >> Hello Didier and all, >> >> We are wondering about the applicability to GNU Ghostscript of the >> recent vulnerabilities discovered in AGPL Ghostscript: >> >> Alex Vong <alexvong1...@gmail.com> skribis: >> >> Salvatore Bonaccorso <car...@debian.org> writes: >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Debian Security Advisory DSA-3691-1 secur...@debian.org >> https://www.debian.org/security/ Salvatore Bonaccorso >> October 12, 2016 https://www.debian.org/security/faq >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Package : ghostscript >> CVE ID : CVE-2013-5653 CVE-2016-7976 CVE-2016-7977 CVE-2016-7978 >> CVE-2016-7979 CVE-2016-8602 >> Debian Bug : 839118 839260 839841 839845 839846 840451 >> >> Several vulnerabilities were discovered in Ghostscript, the GPL >> PostScript/PDF interpreter, which may lead to the execution of arbitrary >> code or information disclosure if a specially crafted Postscript file is >> processed. >> >> [...] >> >> I've checked just now. GNU Ghostscript is also affected at least by >> CVE-2016-8602. Looking at the patch in this bug report[0] and the >> source[1], one can see that the vulnerable lines are present in GNU >> Ghostscript. What should we do now? >> >> [0]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840451 >> [1]: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/ghostscript.git/tree/psi/zht2.c >> >> WDYT? Perhaps a new release incorporating the fixes is in order? >> >> FYI, I ported the upstream patches to GNU ghostscript for GNU Guix. >> You can find them here: >> >> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=1de17a648fa631f0074d315bfff0716220ce4880 >> >> Mark
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
