Home page logo
/

oss-sec logo oss-sec mailing list archives

Re: CVE Request: Multiple issues fixed in wireshark 1.6.2
From: Josh Bressers <bressers () redhat com>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:49:21 -0400 (EDT)

----- Original Message -----
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.


I wasn't thinking in the sense of live monitoring. You're right of course,
which also means previous crash IDs were needed.

Sorry for the confusion.

Thanks.

-- 
    JB


  By Date           By Thread  

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