On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 05:30:19PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:55:20PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:35:02PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:09:58PM -0400, Eric Paris wrote: > >> >> >> From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Fixes an easy DoS and possible information disclosure. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> This does nothing about the broken state of x32 auditing. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> eparis: If the admin has enabled auditd and has specifically loaded audit > >> >> >> rules. This bug has been around since before git. Wow... > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Paris <eparis@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> >> >> --- > >> >> >> kernel/auditsc.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++--------- > >> >> >> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >> >> > > >> >> > Did this patch get dropped somewhere? Isn't it a valid bugfix, or did I > >> >> > miss a later conversation about this? > >> >> > >> >> Hmm. It seems that it didn't make it into Linus' tree. Crap. > >> >> > >> >> IMO we need some kind of real tracking system for issues reported to > >> >> security@. > >> > > >> > That seems to be my mbox at times :) > >> > > >> > But yes, having something "real" might be good if the load gets higher, > >> > right now it's so low that my "sweep pending security patches" task > >> > usually catches anything pending, which is rare. > >> > > >> > >> There are currently at least two issues that I reported that are stuck > >> in limbo: this one and the (not-yet-public) vfs thing. > > > > That was next on my list to poke people about... > > > >> And there's the CVE-2014-0181 regression fix that almost got > >> forgotten, but that isn't really a security issue. > > > > What is that, where was that reported? > > commit 2d7a85f4b06e9c27ff629f07a524c48074f07f81 > Author: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri May 30 11:04:00 2014 -0700 > > netlink: Only check file credentials for implicit destinations > > > The security issue got fixed quickly, but the fix turned out to be problematic. Ah, thanks, I rely on Dave to send me networking stable patches, I'm sure he's on this... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html