Bug#583183: /usr/bin/gs: Insecure gs initialization

2010-06-02 Thread Moritz Muehlenhoff
paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote: The ghostscript people in http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691339 told me to use the -P- switch, and marked it RESOLVED WONTFIX. I guess -P- should be the default, as well as -dSAFER should be. I agree, instead of fixing this in every single

Bug#583183: /usr/bin/gs: Insecure gs initialization

2010-06-01 Thread Michael Gilbert
wouldn't it make more sense to solve these issues in the ghostscript package by itself; rather than 100 different packages. even if ghostscript won't change their code, debian always has the option to fix it anyway. that could be done be either applying a patch that automatically uses the

Bug#583183: /usr/bin/gs: Insecure gs initialization

2010-05-31 Thread paul . szabo
Further gs issues. The gs scripts mentioned below are in /usr/bin: bdftops dumphint dvipdf eps2eps font2c gsbj gsdj gsdj500 gslj gslp gsnd pdf2dsc pdf2ps pdfopt pf2afm pfbtopfa printafm ps2ascii ps2epsi ps2pdf ps2pdf12 ps2pdf13 ps2pdf14 ps2pdfwr ps2ps ps2ps2 wftopfa (maybe others?). The

Bug#583183: /usr/bin/gs: Insecure gs initialization

2010-05-31 Thread paul . szabo
Should some or all be alerted to the this security issue? So far gv and libspectre1 only have been alerted (bugs #583316 and #583634). Yes, please. Done, all mentioned packages alerted: http://bugs.debian.org/584039 a2ps http://bugs.debian.org/583994 advi http://bugs.debian.org/583995

Bug#583183: /usr/bin/gs: Insecure gs initialization

2010-05-31 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
tags 583183 help thanks On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 01:36:00PM +1000, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote: Seems to me that the following packages depend on ghostscript: advi advi-examples asymptote bmv c2050 capisuite courier-faxmail cups cups-pdf epix1 epstool fbi fig2ps flpsed gv hevea hpijs

Bug#583183: /usr/bin/gs: Insecure gs initialization

2010-05-30 Thread paul . szabo
Seems to me that the following packages depend on ghostscript: advi advi-examples asymptote bmv c2050 capisuite courier-faxmail cups cups-pdf epix1 epstool fbi fig2ps flpsed gv hevea hpijs hylafax-client hylafax-server hyperlatex ifhp ijsgutenprint kghostview latex-make libgs-dev

Bug#583183: /usr/bin/gs: Insecure gs initialization

2010-05-28 Thread paul . szabo
I guess this issue can be exploited remotely. If /etc/mailcap uses gs, then we are done: neither -P- nor -dSAFER are defaults. My Debian /etc/mailcap uses gv, and gv knows to use -dSAFER. First feed the victim a bad PS file named gs_res.ps or pdf_base.ps or similar. No harm done yet. Then feed

Bug#583183: /usr/bin/gs: Insecure gs initialization

2010-05-26 Thread paul . szabo
The ghostscript people in http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691339 told me to use the -P- switch, and marked it RESOLVED WONTFIX. I guess -P- should be the default, as well as -dSAFER should be. Cheers, Paul Paul Szabo p...@maths.usyd.edu.au http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/psz/

Bug#583183: /usr/bin/gs: Insecure gs initialization

2010-05-25 Thread Paul Szabo
Package: ghostscript Version: 8.62.dfsg.1-3.2lenny1 Severity: grave File: /usr/bin/gs Tags: security Justification: user security hole Please see http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691339 for details, quoted below for completeness. I am not convinced that my security wrapper protects