Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-18 Thread Alvar Freude

Hi,

-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  What about checking the input for backslash, quote, 
 and double quote (\')?  If you are not taking care of those in input
 then  crashing the backend is going to be the least of your worries. 

with Perl and *using placeholders and bind values*, the application
developer has not to worry about this. So, usually I don't check the
values in my applications (e.g. if only values between 1 and 5 are
allowed and under normal circumstances only these are possible), it's the
task of the database (check constraint). 


Ciao
  Alvar


-- 
** ODEM ist für den poldi Award nominiert! http://www.poldiaward.de/
** http://www.poldiaward.de/index.php?display=detailcat=audiitem=24
** http://odem.org/
** Mehr Projekte: http://alvar.a-blast.org/



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-12 Thread Mike Mascari

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
 
  Hey yep, good point.
 
  Is this the only way that we know of non postgresql-superusers to be
  able to take out the server other than by extremely non-optimal,
  resource wasting queries?
 
  If we release a 7.2.2 because of this, can we be pretty sure we have a
  no known vulnerabilities release, or are there other small holes which
  should be fixed too?
 
 What about that select cash_out(2) crashes because of opaque entry in the
 TODO?  That really needs to be fixed.
 
 I was talking to a CS lecturer about switching to postgres from oracle when
 7.3 comes out and all he said was how easily is it hacked?.  He says their
 systems are the most constantly bombarded in universities.  What could I
 say?  That any unprivileged user can just go 'select cash_out(2)' to DOS the
 backend?

If he's using Oracle already, he ought to check out:

http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2002-08.html

I'd still think it would be a good policy to make a security release.
However, without user resource limits in PostgreSQL, anyone can make a
machine useless with a query like:

SELECT * 
FROM pg_class a, pg_class b, pg_class c, pg_class d, pg_class e, ... ;

Mike Mascari
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-12 Thread Florian Weimer

Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Am I understanding this right:
  - A PostgreSQL 7.2.1 server can be crashed if it gets passed certain
 date values which would be accepted by standard front end parsing? 

 AFAIK it's a buffer overrun issue, so anything that looks like a
 reasonable date would *not* cause the problem.

Yes, but if you just check that the date given by the user matches the
regular expression [0-9]+-[0-9]+-[0-9]+, it's still possible to
crash the backend.

-- 
Florian Weimer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
University of Stuttgart   http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/
RUS-CERT  fax +49-711-685-5898

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-12 Thread Florian Weimer

Mike Mascari [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 I'd still think it would be a good policy to make a security release.
 However, without user resource limits in PostgreSQL, anyone can make a
 machine useless with a query like:

 SELECT * 
 FROM pg_class a, pg_class b, pg_class c, pg_class d, pg_class e, ... ;

But this requires to be able to send arbitrary SQL commands; just
feeding a specially crafted date string usually does not.

-- 
Florian Weimer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
University of Stuttgart   http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/
RUS-CERT  fax +49-711-685-5898

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-12 Thread Greg Copeland

Well, if it's a buffer overrun, there is certainly potential for risks
well beyond that of simply crashing the be.  It's certainly possible
that a simple bug in one cgi script or web site could allow someone to
execute code on the database host because of this bug.  Assuming they
are running the be as postgres or some other seemingly harmless 
user, it's still possible that complete destruction of any and all
databases which are hosted and accessible by this user can be utterly
destroyed or miscellaneously corrupted.

Buffer over runs should be treated with the up most urgency and
respect.  IMO, any known buffer overrun is worthy of an emergency fix
and corresponding advisory.

Greg Copeland


On Sun, 2002-08-11 at 12:09, Tom Lane wrote:
 Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  Am I understanding this right:
   - A PostgreSQL 7.2.1 server can be crashed if it gets passed certain
  date values which would be accepted by standard front end parsing? 
 
 AFAIK it's a buffer overrun issue, so anything that looks like a
 reasonable date would *not* cause the problem.
 
   regards, tom lane
 
 ---(end of broadcast)---
 TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
 
 http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html




signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-12 Thread Florian Weimer

Greg Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Well, if it's a buffer overrun, there is certainly potential for risks
 well beyond that of simply crashing the be.

It's a buffer overrun, but the data has to pass through the date/time
parser in the backend, so it's not entirely obvious how you can
exploit this to run arbitrary code.

-- 
Florian Weimer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
University of Stuttgart   http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/
RUS-CERT  fax +49-711-685-5898

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-12 Thread Florian Weimer

Gavin Sherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Yes, but if you just check that the date given by the user matches the
 regular expression [0-9]+-[0-9]+-[0-9]+, it's still possible to
 crash the backend.

 Anyone who is using that regular expression in an attempt to validate a
 user supplied date is already in trouble.

I don't understand why extremely strict syntax checks are necessary.
The database has to parse it again anyway, and if you can't rely on
the database to get this simple parsing right, will it store your
data?  Such a reasoning doesn't seem to be too far-fetched to me

I would probably impose a length limit in the frontend that uses the
database, but the PostgreSQL documentation does not state that this is
a requirement (because the parsers in the backend are so fragile).

-- 
Florian Weimer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
University of Stuttgart   http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/
RUS-CERT  fax +49-711-685-5898

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-12 Thread Gavin Sherry

On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Florian Weimer wrote:

 Gavin Sherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
  Yes, but if you just check that the date given by the user matches the
  regular expression [0-9]+-[0-9]+-[0-9]+, it's still possible to
  crash the backend.
 
  Anyone who is using that regular expression in an attempt to validate a
  user supplied date is already in trouble.
 
 I don't understand why extremely strict syntax checks are necessary.
 The database has to parse it again anyway, and if you can't rely on
 the database to get this simple parsing right, will it store your
 data?  Such a reasoning doesn't seem to be too far-fetched to me

Why attempt to validate the user data at all if you're going to do a bad
job of it? Moreover, 'rely on the database to get this ... right': what
kind of security principle is that? For someone interested in security,
you've just broken the most important principle.

As to your other point -- that this bug in the data/time code actually
*reflects* the quality and reliability of the database itself -- you've
really gone too far. The best software has bugs. The reason that no one is
jumping up and down making releases and giving you a medal is that (1) it
is still questionable as to whether or not this bug exists in 7.2.1 (2) it
does not appear to be exploitable (3) it could only be used to cause a
denial of service by an authorised user (4) it is common practise for
database application developers to validate user input and if they don't
they have bigger problems than a potential DoS on their hands.

Gavin


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-12 Thread Dave Page



 -Original Message-
 From: Gavin Sherry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: 12 August 2002 15:15
 To: Florian Weimer
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend 
 possible (was: Re:
 
 
 On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Florian Weimer wrote:
 
  Gavin Sherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  
   Yes, but if you just check that the date given by the 
 user matches 
   the regular expression [0-9]+-[0-9]+-[0-9]+, it's 
 still possible 
   to crash the backend.
  
   Anyone who is using that regular expression in an attempt to 
   validate a user supplied date is already in trouble.
  
  I don't understand why extremely strict syntax checks are 
 necessary. 
  The database has to parse it again anyway, and if you can't rely on 
  the database to get this simple parsing right, will it store your 
  data?  Such a reasoning doesn't seem to be too far-fetched to me
 
 Why attempt to validate the user data at all if you're going 
 to do a bad job of it? Moreover, 'rely on the database to get 
 this ... right': what kind of security principle is that? For 
 someone interested in security, you've just broken the most 
 important principle.

If I write code in a Microsoft product such as VB it will happily accept
timestamps such as '2001-12-23 22.15.01' which is a perfectly valid date
in some parts of the world. PostgreSQL will barf on the .'s - is it
expected then that I write my own validation/parsing code to replace
Microsoft's in this and every other area that may need checking just
because PostgreSQL doesn't understand a particular format? I would
rather let PostgreSQL alone know about it's oddities and just throw me
an error I can deal with in such cases.

Regards, Dave.

PS (Gavin). Thanks for the CREATE OR REPLACE's you recently submitted!

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-12 Thread Don Baccus

Gavin Sherry wrote:

 As to your other point -- that this bug in the data/time code actually
 *reflects* the quality and reliability of the database itself -- you've
 really gone too far. The best software has bugs.

For example, in the current version of Oracle 9i, if a client (say 
SQL*Plus) is running on a linux box and talking to Oracle running on a 
Solaris box, executes the following:

create table foo(i integer primary key, bar blob);

... then later does ...

update foo set bar=empty_blob() where i = some key value

The Oracle server on Solaris crashes.  *the whole thing* BANG! 
Shot-to-the-head-dead.  Not the user's client - the server.

This means that any user with the right to update a single table with a 
blob can crash Oracle at will.

What does this say about Oracle's overall reliability?

As Gavin says all software has bugs.  Most of PG's bugs are far less 
spectacular than the Oracle bug I mention here.

Overall I rate PG and Oracle as being about equivalent in terms of bugs.

-- 
Don Baccus
Portland, OR
http://donb.photo.net, http://birdnotes.net, http://openacs.org


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-12 Thread ngpg

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Florian Weimer) wrote in 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Gavin Sherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
 Yes, but if you just check that the date given by the user matches the
 regular expression [0-9]+-[0-9]+-[0-9]+, it's still possible to
 crash the backend.
 
 Anyone who is using that regular expression in an attempt to validate a
 user supplied date is already in trouble.
 
 I don't understand why extremely strict syntax checks are necessary.
 The database has to parse it again anyway, and if you can't rely on
 the database to get this simple parsing right, will it store your
 data?  Such a reasoning doesn't seem to be too far-fetched to me

I believe this is often referred to as the layered onion approach of 
security, besides that what constitutes extremely strict syntax checking is 
somewhat subjective.  What about checking the input for backslash, quote, 
and double quote (\')?  If you are not taking care of those in input then 
crashing the backend is going to be the least of your worries.  I think 
there needs to be some level of checking before the input is blindly passed 
to the backend for parsing.  Typically the input for an individual field 
wouldnt be more than ~255 characters, unless you are dealing with TEXT or 
lo's.  I dont consider adding a length check to the usual \' check to be 
extreme... but perhaps just as necssary?


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-11 Thread Florian Weimer

Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Is it possible to crash a 7.2.1 backend without having an entry in the
 pg_hba.conf file?

No, but think of web applications and things like that.  The web
frontend might pass in a date string which crashes the server backend.
Since the crash can be triggered by mere data, an attacker does not
have to be able to send specific SQL statements to the server.

-- 
Florian Weimer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
University of Stuttgart   http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/
RUS-CERT  fax +49-711-685-5898

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-11 Thread Justin Clift

Hi Florian,

Am I understanding this right:

 - A PostgreSQL 7.2.1 server can be crashed if it gets passed certain
date values which would be accepted by standard front end parsing? 
So, a web application layer can request a date from a user, do standard
integrity checks (like looking for weird characters and formatting
hacks) on the date given, then use the date as part of a SQL query, and
PostgreSQL will die?

?

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift


Florian Weimer wrote:
 
 Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
  Is it possible to crash a 7.2.1 backend without having an entry in the
  pg_hba.conf file?
 
 No, but think of web applications and things like that.  The web
 frontend might pass in a date string which crashes the server backend.
 Since the crash can be triggered by mere data, an attacker does not
 have to be able to send specific SQL statements to the server.
 
 --
 Florian Weimer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 University of Stuttgart   http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/
 RUS-CERT  fax +49-711-685-5898

-- 
My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there.
   - Indira Gandhi

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-11 Thread Tom Lane

Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Am I understanding this right:
  - A PostgreSQL 7.2.1 server can be crashed if it gets passed certain
 date values which would be accepted by standard front end parsing? 

AFAIK it's a buffer overrun issue, so anything that looks like a
reasonable date would *not* cause the problem.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-11 Thread Florian Weimer

Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  - A PostgreSQL 7.2.1 server can be crashed if it gets passed certain
 date values which would be accepted by standard front end parsing? 
 So, a web application layer can request a date from a user, do standard
 integrity checks (like looking for weird characters and formatting
 hacks) on the date given, then use the date as part of a SQL query, and
 PostgreSQL will die?

It depends on the checking.  If you just check that the date consists
of digits (and a few additional characters), it's possible to crash
the server.

-- 
Florian Weimer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
University of Stuttgart   http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/
RUS-CERT  fax +49-711-685-5898

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-11 Thread Justin Clift

Hi Florian,

Very hard call.

If this was even a fringe case whereby even only a few places that are
doing the right thing would be compromisable, then we should probably
go for a 7.2.2.  Even if it's only 7.2.1 with this one bug fix.

However, it sounds like this bug is really only going to affect those
places which aren't correctly implementing *proper*, *decent* input
validation, and are then passing this not-properly-checked value
straight into a SQL string for execution by the server.

Doing that (not input checking properly) is a brain damaged concept all
by itself.  :(

Is this scenario of not properly checking the input the only way
PostgreSQL could be crashed by this bug In Real Life?

Having said this, is this what 7.2.2 here would require doing:

- Create an archive of 7.2.1+bugfix, and call it 7.2.2, gzip, md5, etc,
as appropriate, put on site
- Update CVS appropriately
- Create a new press release for 7.2.2, spread that appropriately too
- Add an entry to the main website

I reckon the only reason for making a 7.2.2 for this would be to help
ensure newbie (or very tired) coders don't get their servers taken out
by clueful malicious types.

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift


Florian Weimer wrote:
 
 Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
   - A PostgreSQL 7.2.1 server can be crashed if it gets passed certain
  date values which would be accepted by standard front end parsing?
  So, a web application layer can request a date from a user, do standard
  integrity checks (like looking for weird characters and formatting
  hacks) on the date given, then use the date as part of a SQL query, and
  PostgreSQL will die?
 
 It depends on the checking.  If you just check that the date consists
 of digits (and a few additional characters), it's possible to crash
 the server.
 
 --
 Florian Weimer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 University of Stuttgart   http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/
 RUS-CERT  fax +49-711-685-5898

-- 
My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there.
   - Indira Gandhi

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-11 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne

 Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  Am I understanding this right:
   - A PostgreSQL 7.2.1 server can be crashed if it gets passed certain
  date values which would be accepted by standard front end parsing?

 AFAIK it's a buffer overrun issue, so anything that looks like a
 reasonable date would *not* cause the problem.

Still, I believe this should require a 7.2.2 release.  Imagine a university
database server for a course for example - the students would just crash it
all the time.

Chris


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-11 Thread Justin Clift

Hi Chris,

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
 
snip 
 Still, I believe this should require a 7.2.2 release.  Imagine a university
 database server for a course for example - the students would just crash it
 all the time.

Hey yep, good point.

Is this the only way that we know of non postgresql-superusers to be
able to take out the server other than by extremely non-optimal,
resource wasting queries?

If we release a 7.2.2 because of this, can we be pretty sure we have a
no known vulnerabilities release, or are there other small holes which
should be fixed too?

:-)

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

 
 Chris

-- 
My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there.
   - Indira Gandhi

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-11 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne

 Hey yep, good point.

 Is this the only way that we know of non postgresql-superusers to be
 able to take out the server other than by extremely non-optimal,
 resource wasting queries?

 If we release a 7.2.2 because of this, can we be pretty sure we have a
 no known vulnerabilities release, or are there other small holes which
 should be fixed too?

What about that select cash_out(2) crashes because of opaque entry in the
TODO?  That really needs to be fixed.

I was talking to a CS lecturer about switching to postgres from oracle when
7.3 comes out and all he said was how easily is it hacked?.  He says their
systems are the most constantly bombarded in universities.  What could I
say?  That any unprivileged user can just go 'select cash_out(2)' to DOS the
backend?

Chris


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-11 Thread Gavin Sherry

On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Justin Clift wrote:

 Hi Chris,
 
 Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
  
 snip 
  Still, I believe this should require a 7.2.2 release.  Imagine a university
  database server for a course for example - the students would just crash it
  all the time.
 
 Hey yep, good point.
 
 Is this the only way that we know of non postgresql-superusers to be
 able to take out the server other than by extremely non-optimal,
 resource wasting queries?
 

Check the TODO:

You are now connected as new user s.
template1= select cash_out(2);
server closed the connection unexpectedly
This probably means the server terminated abnormally
before or while processing the request.
The connection to the server was lost. Attempting reset: Failed.
! \q
[swm@laptop a]$ bin/psql template1
psql: could not connect to server: Connection refused
Is the server running locally and accepting
connections on Unix domain socket /tmp/.s.PGSQL.3987?
[swm@laptop a]$

---

Gavin


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-11 Thread Bruce Momjian


Yea, I added that TODO entry, and I am embarrased that a single cash_out
call could crash the backend.  I thought about not making this public
knowledge, but making it public hasn't marshalled any forces to fix it
so maybe I was wrong to put it on TODO.

---

Gavin Sherry wrote:
 On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Justin Clift wrote:
 
  Hi Chris,
  
  Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
   
  snip 
   Still, I believe this should require a 7.2.2 release.  Imagine a university
   database server for a course for example - the students would just crash it
   all the time.
  
  Hey yep, good point.
  
  Is this the only way that we know of non postgresql-superusers to be
  able to take out the server other than by extremely non-optimal,
  resource wasting queries?
  
 
 Check the TODO:
 
 You are now connected as new user s.
 template1= select cash_out(2);
 server closed the connection unexpectedly
 This probably means the server terminated abnormally
 before or while processing the request.
 The connection to the server was lost. Attempting reset: Failed.
 ! \q
 [swm@laptop a]$ bin/psql template1
 psql: could not connect to server: Connection refused
 Is the server running locally and accepting
 connections on Unix domain socket /tmp/.s.PGSQL.3987?
 [swm@laptop a]$
 
 ---
 
 Gavin
 
 
 ---(end of broadcast)---
 TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
 (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
 

-- 
  Bruce Momjian|  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive, |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.|  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: [HACKERS] [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re:

2002-08-09 Thread Justin Clift

Hi Florian,

Is it possible to crash a 7.2.1 backend without having an entry in the
pg_hba.conf file?

i.e. Is every PostgreSQL 7.2.1 installation around vulnerable to a
remote DoS (or worse) from any user anywhere, at this moment in time?

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift


Florian Weimer wrote:
 
 Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
  Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
  Thomas can correct me if I'm mistaken, but I believe these changes apply
  to the new integer datetime code
 
  No, it's possible to crash the backend in 7.2, too.
 
 And 7.2.1, of course.
 
 Let me ask again: Do you plan to address this in an update for 7.2.1?
 
 --
 Florian Weimer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 University of Stuttgart   http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/
 RUS-CERT  fax +49-711-685-5898
 
 ---(end of broadcast)---
 TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
 
 http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html

-- 
My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there.
   - Indira Gandhi

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly