And there'll be more updates coming, no doubt, as further related
vulnerabilities have been found - see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellshock_%28software_bug%29

Gavin

On 29 September 2014 11:01, McGinley, Ian R <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Two releases since the IDR was applied on Friday.
>
> [email protected]:~$ pkg list -af bash
> NAME (PUBLISHER)                                  VERSION
>   IFO
> shell/bash                                        4.1.11-0.175.2.2.0.8.0
>    ---
> shell/bash                                        4.1.11-0.175.2.2.0.7.0
>    ---
> shell/bash
> 4.1.11-0.175.2.0.0.42.1.1399.1 i--
> shell/bash                                        4.1.11-0.175.2.0.0.42.1
>   ---
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ian McGinley
> Application Technology
> Consumer and Digital - Online
> 03 8647 2433
> 0457 724 419
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Hogard [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Saturday, 27 September 2014 10:21 PM
> To: Tim Hogard
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [msosug] bash vulnerability in Solaris?.
>
> pkg update sent a 2nd version of bash just moments ago.
>
>
> On my t5120 toybox running 11.2:
>
> # cp /usr/bin/bash /tmp
> # pkg update
> # ls -l /usr/bin/bash /tmp/bash
> -r-xr-xr-x   1 root     root     1245760 Sep 27 22:14 /tmp/bash
> -r-xr-xr-x   1 root     bin      1245752 Sep 27 22:15 /usr/bin/bash
> # md5sum /usr/bin/bash /tmp/bash
> a08d7d8081e345081cb2c72c0c5f8ff7  /usr/bin/bash
> fce382e2c5794e38434d152e811f17d7  /tmp/bash
>
>
> -tim
>
>
> On Sep 27, 2014, at 10:14 AM, Tim Hogard wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sep 26, 2014, at 8:49 PM, Murray Blakeman wrote:
> >
> >> Not sure if anyone is interested.  For Solaris 11+.
> >>
> >> http://www.solarismultimedia.com/?q=node/108
> >>
> >> May not be good practice but it'll do for the moment.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Murray
> >
> > A poorly fixed bash was updated yesterday when I did a "pkg update"
> >
> > I say poorly fixed because the parser appears to bail out when it sees
> > anything funny rather than doing the proper thing which is to parse
> > correctly and process to the proper syntax error.  The result is
> > someone will find a way to bypass this fix.  I think this fix came
> > from the bash team.
> >
> > -tim
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On 26/09/2014 09:43, McGinley, Ian R wrote:
> >>> Solaris 10 SPARC
> >>>
> >>> PRE Install of IDR
> >>> $ env x='() { :;}; echo vulnerable' bash -c "echo this is a test"
> >>> vulnerable
> >>> this is a test
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> POST INSTALL of IDR (no logout and no reboot)
> >>>
> >>> root@ccssapprfvs001[DHS-Stage1]# env X='() { (a)=>\' bash -c "echo
> >>> echo vuln"; [[ "$(cat echo)" == "vuln" ]] && echo "still vulnerable
> >>> "
> >>> bash: X: line 1: syntax error near unexpected token `='
> >>> bash: X: line 1: `'
> >>> bash: error importing function definition for `X'
> >>> echo vuln
> >>> cat: cannot open echo
> >>> root@ccssapprfvs001[DHS-Stage1]# env x='() { :;}; echo vulnerable'
> >>> bash -c "echo this is a test"
> >>> bash: warning: x: ignoring function definition attempt
> >>> bash: error importing function definition for `x'
> >>> this is a test
> >>>
> >>> Ian McGinley
> >>> Application Technology
> >>> Consumer and Digital - Online
> >>> 03 8647 2433
> >>> 0457 724 419
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Andre van Eyssen [mailto:[email protected]]
> >>> Sent: Friday, 26 September 2014 9:44 AM
> >>> To: McGinley, Ian R
> >>> Cc: Boyd Adamson; Andrew Watkins; [email protected]
> >>> Subject: Re: [msosug] bash vulnerability in Solaris?.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Ian -- you're doing a great job of keeping the list updated. For the
> >>> benefit of the subscriber base, can you update the list as patches
> >>> roll in?
> >>>
> >>> McGinley, Ian R wrote:
> >>>> Current info i've got:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> IDR's are in test for
> >>>>
> >>>> Solaris 11.2 -> 11.2 SRU 2.5
> >>>>
> >>>> Solaris 11.1 -> Solaris 11.1 SRU 12.5
> >>>>
> >>>> Solaris 11.1 SRU 13.6 -> Solaris 11.1 SRU 21.4.1
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Solaris 10 (with dependency on 12654{6..7}-05 already in place)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Solaris 9
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> And Solaris 8 coming soon.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Ian McGinley
> >>>>
> >>>> Application Technology
> >>>>
> >>>> Consumer and Digital - Online
> >>>>
> >>>> 03 8647 2433
> >>>>
> >>>> 0457 724 419
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> *From:*Boyd Adamson [mailto:[email protected]]
> >>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 25 September 2014 6:55 PM
> >>>> *To:* Andrew Watkins
> >>>> *Cc:* [email protected]
> >>>> *Subject:* Re: [msosug] bash vulnerability in Solaris?.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Will indeed be interesting to see what they do. Another aspect is
> >>>> that in the past Solaris 11 package  updates have only ever been
> >>>> bundled into SRUs that also included reboot-requiring packages. If
> >>>> they continue this practice then we will be rebooting for an update
> >>>> that really only requires replacing a single binary, while our
> >>>> Linux systems are already upgraded without outage.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 25 Sep 2014, at 6:27 pm, Andrew Watkins <[email protected]
> >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>    Yes, we could all compile and install a new version or remove
> >>>> bash,
> >>>>    but  it will be interesting to see how Oracle handle it for all
> >>>> the
> >>>>    Solaris 11 releases. Currently they only release patches for the
> >>>>    latest version 11.2, so that is why I am interested in what they
> >>>>    will do for this one.
> >>>>
> >>>>    What happens in the Zero Day Security bug was in the Solaris
> >>>> 11.0
> >>>>    kernel, so there is no way of you fixing it? Will they only
> >>>> release
> >>>>    a patch for 11.2 or will they back port?
> >>>>
> >>>>    Happy fixing.
> >>>>
> >>>>    Andrew
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>    On 25/09/2014 09:18, Ben Couldrey wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>        We should all be running zsh anyway... (sorry Boyd, had to get
> >>>> in
> >>>>        before you did)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>        Ben
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>            On 25 Sep 2014, at 6:13 pm, Andrew Watkins
> >>>>            <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>            It will be interesting if Oracle release a bash patch
> >>>> for
> >>>>            all Solaris 11 versions (11, 11.1 and 11.2).
> >>>>            Or will the force everyone to go to Solaris 11.2 SRU
> >>>> latest
> >>>>
> >>>>            Andrew
> >>>>
> >>>>            On 25/09/2014 08:21, McGinley, Ian R wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>                Log an SR asking for it.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                We've got one in the system for tracking internal
> >>>> change
> >>>>                management purposes.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                In the mean time if it's super dangerous for you,
> >>>> then
> >>>>                pkgrm SUNWbash, or at least chmod 000 /bin/bash
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                Ian McGinley
> >>>>
> >>>>                Application Technology
> >>>>
> >>>>                Consumer and Digital - Online
> >>>>
> >>>>                03 8647 2433
> >>>>
> >>>>                0457 724 419
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                *From:*Tony Payne [mailto:[email protected]]
> >>>>                *Sent:* Thursday, 25 September 2014 11:39 AM
> >>>>                *To:* msosug
> >>>>                *Subject:* [msosug] bash vulnerability in Solaris?.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                Hi All,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                I'm sure you've all heard about the bash
> >>>> vulnerability
> >>>>                where: *"specially-crafted environment variables can
> >>>> be
> >>>>                used to inject shell commands" unearthed by Stephane
> >>>>                Chazelas very recently?.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                Many linux flavors have already released patches and
> >>>>                according to the following test (see in full at:
> >>>>                https://access.redhat.com/articles/1200223)
> >>>> Solaris 10
> >>>>                at least appears to be vulnerable.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                =========================
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                    Diagnostic Steps
> >>>>
> >>>>                To test if your version of Bash is vulnerable to
> >>>> this
> >>>>                issue, run the following command:
> >>>>
> >>>>                $ env x='() { :;}; echo vulnerable'  bash -c "echo
> >>>> this is a test"
> >>>>
> >>>>                If the output of the above command looks as follows:
> >>>>
> >>>>                vulnerable
> >>>>
> >>>>                this is a test
> >>>>
> >>>>                you are using a vulnerable version of Bash. The
> >>>> patch
> >>>>                used to fix this issue ensures that no code is
> >>>> allowed
> >>>>                after the end of a Bash function. Thus, if you run
> >>>> the
> >>>>                above example with the patched version of Bash, you
> >>>>                should get an output similar to:
> >>>>
> >>>>                $ env x='() { :;}; echo vulnerable'  bash -c "echo
> >>>> this is a test"
> >>>>
> >>>>                bash: warning: x: ignoring function definition
> >>>> attempt
> >>>>
> >>>>                bash: error importing function definition for `x'
> >>>>
> >>>>                this is a test
> >>>>
> >>>>                =========================
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                Does anyone know if there is, or is planned, a patch
> >>>> for
> >>>>                Solaris' bash implementation?.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                *
> >>>>
> >>>> https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2014-6271?sc_cid=7016000
> >>>> 0000e8eaAAA&
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2014-6271?sc_cid=701600
> >>>> 000
> >>>> 00e8eaAAA&>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                --
> >>>>                Cheers,
> >>>>
> >>>>                Tony.
> >>>>                                            \|/ ____ \|/
> >>>>                                             @~/ ,. \~@
> >>>>                                            /_( \__/ )_\
> >>>>
> >>>> +------------------------------
> >>>> \__U_/---------------------------------
> >>>> -+
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>                _______________________________________________
> >>>>
> >>>>                msosug mailing list
> >>>>
> >>>>                [email protected]
> >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>
> >>>>
> >>>>                http://mexico.purplecow.org/m/listinfo/msosug
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>            --
> >>>>
> >>>>            Andrew Watkins * Birkbeck, University of London *
> >>>> Computer Science *
> >>>>
> >>>>            * UKOUG Solaris SIG Co-Chair *
> >>>>
> >>>>            http://notallmicrosoft.blogspot.com/
> >>>>
> >>>>            _______________________________________________
> >>>>            msosug mailing list
> >>>>            [email protected]
> >>>> <mailto:[email protected]
> >>>>>
> >>>>            http://mexico.purplecow.org/m/listinfo/msosug
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>    --
> >>>>
> >>>>    Andrew Watkins * Birkbeck, University of London * Computer
> >>>> Science
> >>>> *
> >>>>
> >>>>    * UKOUG Solaris SIG Co-Chair *
> >>>>
> >>>>    http://notallmicrosoft.blogspot.com/
> >>>>
> >>>>    _______________________________________________
> >>>>    msosug mailing list
> >>>>    [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >>>>    http://mexico.purplecow.org/m/listinfo/msosug
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> msosug mailing list
> >>>> [email protected]
> >>>> http://mexico.purplecow.org/m/listinfo/msosug
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Andre van Eyssen
> >>> mail: [email protected]            (alt: [email protected])
> >>> purplecow.org: UNIX for the masses   http://www2.purplecow.org
> >>> purplecow.org: PCOWpix               http://pix.purplecow.org
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> msosug mailing list
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> http://mexico.purplecow.org/m/listinfo/msosug
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> msosug mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://mexico.purplecow.org/m/listinfo/msosug
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > msosug mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://mexico.purplecow.org/m/listinfo/msosug
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> msosug mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mexico.purplecow.org/m/listinfo/msosug
>
> _______________________________________________
> msosug mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mexico.purplecow.org/m/listinfo/msosug
>
_______________________________________________
msosug mailing list
[email protected]
http://mexico.purplecow.org/m/listinfo/msosug

Reply via email to