oss-sec mailing list archives

Re: CVE request: GNU nano (minor)


From: Josh Bressers <bressers () redhat com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:22:05 -0400 (EDT)

----- "Dan Rosenberg" <dan.j.rosenberg () gmail com> wrote:

Two issues were recently addressed upstream for GNU nano to provide
better security when editing files owned by other untrusted users,
especially when editing as root.  I'm not sure if either of these
issues require CVE identifiers due to the narrow circumstances in
which they can be exploited, but I figured I'd leave that up to you.

Changelog is at
http://svn.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/trunk/nano/ChangeLog?root=nano&view=log,
relevant entries at revisions 4490, 4491, 4493, and 4496.

1.  When editing a file owned by another user, the owner of the file may
replace the file mid-editing with a symbolic link, resulting in the
editor overwriting the target of the symbolic link on saving with the
privileges of the user doing the editing, without any warning to the
editor.  Since this could be considered akin to replacing a target being
chown'd or chmod'd with a symbolic link and requires a very targeted
attack, I would lean towards this not needing a CVE, but that's your
call.

Since they fixed it, and it is a plausible attack, I'm assigning this
CVE-2010-1160


2.  When backup files are enabled and root is editing a file by an
untrusted user, that user may exploit race conditions in the creation of
backup files to take ownership of arbitrary files.  While the scenario
for exploitation is somewhat unlikely (root editing untrusted files),
this attack can be done reliably and without requiring precise timing, so
this seems to be a good candidate for a CVE.


CVE-2010-1161

Thanks.

-- 
    JB


Current thread: