oss-sec mailing list archives
Re: CVE Request: UDP checksum DoS
From: cve-assign () mitre org
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 05:23:11 -0400 (EDT)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
However, the presence of "return -EAGAIN" may also have been a security problem in some realistic circumstances. For example, maybe there's an attacker who can't transmit a flood with invalid checksums, but can sometimes inject one packet with an invalid checksum. The goal of this attacker isn't to cause a system hang; the goal is to cause an EPOLLET epoll application to stop reading for an indefinitely long period of time. This scenario can't also be covered by CVE-2015-5364. Is it better to have no CVE ID at all, e.g., is udp_recvmsg/udpv6_recvmsg simply not intended to defend against this scenario?
It seems reasonable to assign a second CVE ID to that issue.
Use CVE-2015-5366. - -- 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) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVmkgoAAoJEKllVAevmvmsCWkH/1xhstkTg/oWb95ua9Jvr6rR hLq8qVNZoel+2k5/73YIkxOAi5UvNPn3/sb75p2vggTIeXhdLK6hJw8nUTRItyUR UhAWrwISpnOxHGKuVOjPoH4e9ujZLNXxDopZW0+eIJLh+Wb3ek00ohJhMNF4Cp5J 9vi759xuM/yNsOqkXE7daIWEHSgkjw1jTs43Hh4L6vV8ixuFN/mNM+u+ljiEGO1/ /SMDUS3ByZKJ+B7odl4fa9s4EB7BO8x0dvZlWeWaGLNShq30nYItpGGJ799lVS81 3JGqrUeqgUumyuy72bd0NtAH1IViOnkHV9MBBFB/G9Whl959h0xdrOiGJh3dxAw= =GBxR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Current thread:
- Re: CVE Request: UDP checksum DoS cve-assign (Jul 01)
- Re: CVE Request: UDP checksum DoS Ben Hutchings (Jul 05)
- Re: CVE Request: UDP checksum DoS cve-assign (Jul 06)
- Re: Re: CVE Request: UDP checksum DoS Gsunde Orangen (Jul 10)
- Re: CVE Request: UDP checksum DoS cve-assign (Jul 06)
- Re: CVE Request: UDP checksum DoS Ben Hutchings (Jul 05)