Re: CVE request: epiphany not checking ssl certs

[Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert () gmail com>]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 14:45:28 -0400 (EDT), Steven M. Christey wrote:
> If an application does not advertise a security feature, then in general 
> we will not give a CVE because of its absence of the feature (I don't want 
> to give out 50,000 CVEs for every protocol that does cleartext 
> transmission... or uses DES... etc.)  Similarly, we generally avoid 
> assigning CVEs to "defense in depth" fixes, although the line between 
> "vulnerability" and "defense in depth" can get fuzzy.
>
> The http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=564690#5 title says 
> "Does not longer check certificates" which could be interpreted to mean 
> that it used to check certs, and now it doesn't.  If that's the case, then 
> it makes sense to assign a CVE.

The feature was lost in the transition from gecko to webkit (or more
accurately libsoup for certificate support). I think it makes sense to
assign an id since it does involve the loss of an expected security
feature.

Mike