Home page logo

oss-sec logo oss-sec mailing list archives

Re: CVE assignment for jinja2
From: "Vincent Danen" <vdanen () redhat com>
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 16:07:23 -0700

On 01/11/2014, at 13:58 PM, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:

Hi Vicnent,

Disclaimer: to be taken with some caution.

On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 01:37:51PM -0700, Vincent Danen wrote:
On 01/10/2014, at 22:34 PM, Kurt Seifried wrote:


dirname = '_jinja2-cache-%d' % os.getuid()

Arun Babu Neelicattu of Red Hat spotted this commit which introduces a
temporary file creation vulnerability. This issue has been assigned
CVE-2014-0012. For information on how to safely create temporary files
please see

For Python simply use ?mkstemp? for files and ?mkdtemp? for
directories from the ?tempfile? module.

MITRE assigned CVE-2014-1402 to this yesterday:

http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2014/q1/71 (the report, the followup has the CVE assignment).

That means you'll need to reject this assignment; the commit that Arun spotted was due to the Debian bug report 
(which the git commit notes, and Ratul linked to in his initial CVE request to the list).

Aren't the two CVE assignments correct this way as the second
temporary file creation vulnerability was introduced by the mentioned

Initially there was assigned CVE-2014-1402 for:


wich is also http://bugs.debian.org/734747 and was attempted to be
fixed with commit

But the above commit introduces a new temporary file creation
vulnerability, which then got CVE-2014-0012 assigned by Kurt.

Yes, all correct.  Which is why I apologized in a subsequent email about the confusion.  =)

Vincent Danen / Red Hat Security Response Team

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

  By Date           By Thread  

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