On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 08:18:57PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 05:35:19PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> Is the issue described below already on your radar screen? I couldn't > >> find it in the relevant files. AFAICT, no CVE name has been assigned. > > > > Its the first I've seen of it, but that doesn't mean much. > > Which GIT tree is the commit from, I checked Linus' 2.6 and it > > doesn't seem to be there. Alternatively, is there a mailing list > > discussion you can point me to? > > It seems to be in Linus' tree. Note that it is not actually recent. > > <http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=55820ee2f8c767a2833b21bd365e5753f50bd8ce> > > There hasn't been a real discussion. I was alerted to this commit by > Herbert Xu's message: > > From: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [CHECKER] buffer overflows in net/core/filter.c? > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 21:55:48 +1000 > Organization: Core > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I found another message referencing this problem. > > From: Chris Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [05/13] [NET]: Fix signedness issues in net/core/filter.c > To: [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: Justin Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Zwane Mwaikambo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "Theodore Ts'o" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Chuck Wolber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 23:53:48 -0700 > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Enyo-Status: sender=12.107.209.244 asn=22753 hflags= mflags=k > > This one suggests it was part of 12.6.2.4. Indeed, there seems to be > this change: > > <http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/chrisw/linux-2.6.12.y.git;a=commit;h=4717ecd49ce5c556d38e8c7b6fdc9fac5d35c00e>
Thanks, Dann and I went over 2.6.4 and noted out findings at http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2005/08/msg00030.html In a nutshell, it wasn't in 2.6.8 or 2.4.27. And it was fixed 2.6.12-2. Its probably worth of a CVE, but from Debian persipective, both sarge and etch are clean. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
