Home page logo

oss-sec logo oss-sec mailing list archives

Re: CVE Request: Multiple issues fixed in wireshark 1.6.2
From: "Steven M. Christey" <coley () rcf-smtp mitre org>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:35:54 -0400 (EDT)

Are the below worth assigning CVE ids to? The advisory seems to suggest they are crash only fixes. Do those deserve CVE IDs? I know we've been fairly generous with wireshark in the past, but I'm wondering if we need to draw a line somewhere.

Crash-only issues are always/typically worth a CVE when it can prevent a product from working in a security context. Wireshark monitors network traffic, sometimes live; therefore, in some reasonable/common usage scenarios, attackers can cause a crash and prevent network activities from being detected.

We apply similar logic in forensics and other scenarios. Therefore a CVE is needed for both wnpa-sec-2011-12 (crash reading live packets) as well as wnpa-sec-2011-14 (by only reading a packet trace file) - in the latter, analysis of a packet trace could be hampered/delayed because the investigator can't use the product without it crashing.

Wireshark does not get any more "preference" than any other tool, except indirectly because it gets more attention.

- Steve

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Josh Bressers wrote:

----- Original Message -----

2. Wireshark Lua script execution vulnerability

Use CVE-2011-3360 for the above.

1, Wireshark CSN.1 dissector vulnerability

3. Wireshark buffer exception handling vulnerability

4. Wireshark OpenSafety dissector vulnerability



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]