CVE Request -- Revelation: 1) Limits effective password length to 32 characters 2) Doesn't iterate the passphrase through SHA algorithm to derive the encryption key

[Jan Lieskovsky <jlieskov () redhat com>]

Hello Kurt, Steve, vendors,

  multiple security flaws have been found in Revelation, a password manager for GNOME 2. Specifically:

1) It was found that Revelation limited effective password lengths to thirty two characters,
which made it easier for context-dependent attackers to successfully conduct brute-force
password guessing attacks,

2) It was found that Revelation did not iterate the particular passphrase through some of
the SHA family of hashing algorithms, in order to derive the encryption key, which made it
easier (in that scenario there were only 7 bits to vary on each character) for context-dependent
attackers to successfully conduct dictionary based password guessing attacks.

Upstream ticket:
[1] http://oss.codepoet.no/revelation/issue/61/file-format-magic-string-version-mismatch

Further references:
[2] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=421571
[3] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168607.html
[4] http://knoxin.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/revelation-password-manager-considered.html
[5] http://westhoffswelt.de/blog/0046_from_revelation_security_to_android_password_managers.html

Could you allocate two CVE ids for these? (I think two are needed for each
of the issues)

Thank you && Regards, Jan.
--
Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat Security Response Team

P.S.: Kurt - regarding time, when this issue has been reported for the first time (thus
      which CVE-201*- id to allocate), it is necessary to find this it out yet.

      Upstream ticket [1] was reported on 2012-02-06 (which would suggest CVE-2012-* one
      to be allocated), but the rest of the links mention this issue has been known for
      longer time, thus please investigate yet. I wanted to Cc- the original ticket
      reporter 'hannibal218bc' on this request (he to clarify), but I doesn't seem to be
      able to find his proper email address / contact. Sorry for that.