mailing list archives
RE: YUI 2.x security issue regarding embedded SWF files -- or, How Not To Handle A Security Disclosure
From: "Christey, Steven M." <coley () mitre org>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 20:56:15 +0000
Sorry for the delay.
If a customer "owns" the systems or networks on which the software is installed, and/or is the entity who MUST take
action to fix the issue, then it qualifies for a CVE.
If the fix for the issue is entirely in the hands of the vendor without any involvement by the consumer at all, then it
does not get a CVE. So, XSS on a custom web site, or a financial web site that exposes credentials, or a "typical"
cloud-based offering, would generally not get a CVE. (Note that this is a gap in the industry, as vulnerability
databases in general don't cover "site-specific" or service-oriented issues.)
Based on the security-announcement-swf-vulnerability-in-yui-2 post, this requires users of YUI 2 to take certain
actions for "Any project that hosts YUI 2 SWF files ... on its own servers." So, this qualifies for a CVE.
From: Kurt Seifried [mailto:kseifried () redhat com]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 3:49 PM
To: oss-security () lists openwall com
Cc: Reed Loden; Christey, Steven M.; security () yuilibrary com
Subject: Re: [oss-security] YUI 2.x security issue regarding embedded SWF files -- or, How Not To Handle A Security
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 11/04/2012 05:13 PM, Kurt Seifried wrote:
On 11/04/2012 01:34 PM, Reed Loden wrote:
I haven't seen this posted at all, but it seems there's some
(major?) security issue regarding the SWF files embedded in YUI
2. The YUI team has published a blog post regarding this problem
asking users to e-mail them for details.
The comments are a great read. Ryan Grove (former Yahoo! and
YUI core team guy) hits the point on the head regarding
disclosure handling of the issue. Apparently, some
people/companies have already been notified directly weeks ago,
and this is how the YUI team is continuing the disclosure process
by just asking projects to e-mail them instead of just releasing
the fix to the public at this stage. :/
Might want to go ahead and get a CVE assigned to whatever this
issue is, and hope more details come out of this soon so YUI 2
users can actually get patched instead of having to request
access to the fix...
~reed (speaking only for himself)
Have any CVE's been issued for this issue? I can't find any. More
to the point does this kind of issue (is it a service strictly?)
even get a CVE? Steve?
Ok please use CVE-2012-5475 for this issue.
Also can security () yuilibrary com follow their disclosure policy listed
at and disclose the problem:
Disclosure of Security Issues
If you've discovered a security flaw in one of our products, please
contact us. Expect to receive an acknowledgement quickly with the best
way to track your report's status. You'll have a direct contact at YUI
while we investigate.
Since issues have varying impact, we ask for your patience while we
make sure everyone who uses our products is protected. We will
disclose a problem once it's confirmed and a resolution is available.
If a fix is required, our release will credit you for your discovery.
Kurt Seifried Red Hat Security Response Team (SRT)
PGP: 0x5E267993 A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----