Home page logo
/

oss-sec logo oss-sec mailing list archives

Re: CVE Requests
From: Mark Stanislav <mark.stanislav () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 21:30:58 -0400

#1,2,3 are all included

#4, each project is linked to where the code (both vulnerable and/or fixed)
lives

#5...
phpMoneyBooks, 1.0.2 and potentially prior versions
phpGradeBook, 1.9.4 and potentially prior versions
phpPaleo, 4.8b155 and potentially prior versions
hbportal, 0.1 and potentially prior versions
eticketing, no version numbering used *shrug*

#6 An e-mail was sent to cve () mitre org 7 days ago without response
#7 All open source
#8 Not embargoed

I think that should do it.

-Mark

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Kurt Seifried <kseifried () redhat com> wrote:

On 03/15/2012 01:18 PM, Mark Stanislav wrote:
Howdy,

I was looking to receive CVEs for the following...

1) phpMoneyBooks (http://phpmoneybooks.com/) has an unauthenticated
local
file inclusion (LFI) vulnerability
* Notified, Response Received, and Patch Released

2) phpGradeBook (http://phpgradebook.com/) has unauthenticated SQL
Database
Exportation
* Notified, Response Received, and Patch Released

3) phpPaleo (http://sourceforge.net/projects/phppaleo/) has an
unauthenticated local file inclusion (LFI) vulnerability
* Notified, Response Received, and Patch Released

4) hbportal (http://sourceforge.net/projects/hbportal/) has a POST-based
SQL injection vulnerability
* Notified

5) e-ticketing (http://sourceforge.net/projects/e-ticketing/) has a
POST-based SQL injection vulnerability
* Notified & Response Received

Thanks!

-Mark

Removed the "no" this time to avoid ambiguity=)

More info would be helpful. Some draft guidelines:

Information for CVE request, REQUIRED:

1) Email address of requester (so we can contact them)
2) Software name and optionally vendor name
3) At least one of (to determine is this a security issue):
 1. Type of vulnerability
 2. Exploitation vectors
 3. Attack outcome
4) For Open Source at least one of:
 1. Link to vulnerable source code or fix
 2. Link to source code change log
 3. Link to security advisory
 4. Link to bug entry
 5. Request comes from project member (a.k.a. "trust me, it's a problem")
5) Affected version(s) (3.2.4, 3.x, current version, all current
releases, something)
6) Whether or not this has been previously requested (i.e. on OSS-Sec or
to cve-assign)
7) Is this an Open Source or commercial software request
8) Is this an embargoed issue (if yes and commercial: send to
cve-assign, if yes and open source: send to vs-sec?)
9) IF multiple issues are listed please list affected versions for each
issue and/or who reported them (so we can determine CVE split/merge).

Information for CVE request, REQUESTED:

1) More of the above information of course
2) Software version(s) fixed (if available)
3) For closed source any of the information from "For Open Source at
least one of:"
4) Any additional information


--

-- Kurt Seifried / Red Hat Security Response Team



  By Date           By Thread  

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