oss-sec mailing list archives

Re: CVE request: ClamAV vulnerabilities


From: cve-assign () mitre org
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 22:08:58 -0500 (EST)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

   https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-devel/commit/71990820d01c246e4e61408a3659dd9d92949b38
   from https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-devel/commits/master/libclamav/wwunpack.c

in which input validation was added. This commit did make it into
0.97.7 (and it's not in 0.97.6). It is also apparently discussed in
https://bugzilla.clamav.net/show_bug.cgi?id=6806 Comment 2.

Use CVE-2013-7087.


 https://bugzilla.clamav.net/show_bug.cgi?id=6809  possible buffer overflow
  https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-devel/commit/e8e3746266dd3f82054ca137b81b800e54de6ebd

  For example, libclamav/yc.c in 0.97.7 has the max_emu variable that is
  apparently involved in preventing the overflow. libclamav/yc.c in 0.97.6
  does not have the max_emu variable at all.

Use CVE-2013-7088.


  https://bugzilla.clamav.net/show_bug.cgi?id=6804  dbg_printhex possible information leak

  We don't know the commit for this, but libclamav/pdf.c in 0.97.6 has
  'dbg_printhex("md5", result, 32)' whereas libclamav/pdf.c in 0.97.7
  has 'dbg_printhex("md5", result, 16)' instead. We realize that the
  security impact might occur in very limited situations (e.g., the
  debug output is given to an untrusted person and the 16 extra bytes
  are somehow sensitive data). But the vendor describes it as "The
  vulnerability is merely debug-level printing" and the word
  "vulnerability" is enough for us in this context.

Use CVE-2013-7089.

- -- 
CVE assignment team, MITRE CVE Numbering Authority
M/S M300
202 Burlington Road, Bedford, MA 01730 USA
[ PGP key available through http://cve.mitre.org/cve/request_id.html ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (SunOS)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSqnnrAAoJEKllVAevmvmsty0H/16a7n4zs1ogQ2AL0dDDUf4f
ebW5FWnsQNa6hTKNYuO71eLbFfjAE/G+uVDGOc++nQ2Vv6gYbG61ufpeN2iaRibs
rkmdEW18vFTcWZQArx4WU5XBtZlA4A7ndugGi1cQPztZgaw8N7e9htLPH+Jc6ab2
GPcHnfILRS+enV0VOIOmQyfvuIGAYMDOrFjc90bT5Mz150U3rPZpAX0sAUi+DQQT
XwVcFbkzmBA9Gp/gwrQpmRLXO9aijMKuGN4l90G/4UpVG5ypxRafAxe4Nszug4ZQ
9RnzTaPKghVAtHzYK/zMAFxqPs2JWL03NqzyYZNBZpW+gsul/WNbSdKJUo8GSQw=
=bnPX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Current thread: