oss-sec mailing list archives
Re: Python robotframework - tmp vuln
From: Kurt Seifried <kseifried () redhat com>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 10:21:10 -0600
On 08/09/14 09:22 AM, cve-assign () mitre org wrote:
This is the first of manyThe MITRE CVE team obviously has no objection to your use of the oss-security list for raising new discussion topics such as the likelihood that a '../tmp/ substring represents a security problem. The comments below are only about obtaining CVE assignments from MITRE.the reason I'm not assigning CVE's for these is this is a side projectA CVE isn't going to be possible without further analysis explaining why a vulnerability exists in the specific case. There can't be an expectation that someone at MITRE is already familiar with the product, or will read and understand the complete source code as part of processing an oss-security message. Items that seem to be missing from the original message include: 1, Is the "merge('../tmp/passing.xml', '../tmp/failing.xml')" debugging code, or is this code realistically used because a different piece of software has created passing.xml and failing.xml files?
It's part of __main__ so it gets executed.
2. If there is a realistic situation in which the "merge('../tmp/passing.xml', '../tmp/failing.xml')" executes, would the cwd realistically be a first-level directory such as the /root or /tmp directory?
yes if you run from within /root or /tmp, the "run from /root" would be the obvious worry as it would indicate the root user is being used.
3. For purposes of risk analysis, is unconstrained use of a ../tmp/ pathname always equivalent to unconstrained use of a /tmp/ pathname?
If it ends up using /tmp/ then I would say that's a problem. is it always a problem? I can't say.
A possible CVE assignment decision might be: A. If a different product came with a test suite containing: test_program > /tmp/merged.xml then it could have a CVE because /tmp/merged.xml might be a symlink to an important file. B. If the test suite were changed to: test_program > ../tmp/merged.xml with no constraints, then it could still have a CVE, because some people run test suites as root with a cwd of the /root directory. C. If ../tmp/ is used in "debugging code" that is intended to be run by a developer who understands the appropriate cwd, and this "debugging code" is not a "test suite" for users, then there is no CVE assignment. Admittedly, there might be cases where the distinction between "debugging code" and "test suite" is completely ambiguous.
-- Kurt Seifried -- Red Hat -- Product Security -- Cloud PGP A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Current thread:
- Python robotframework - tmp vuln Kurt Seifried (Sep 07)
- Re: Python robotframework - tmp vuln Kurt Seifried (Sep 07)
- Re: Python robotframework - tmp vuln coderman (Sep 07)
- Re: Python robotframework - tmp vuln cve-assign (Sep 08)
- Re: Python robotframework - tmp vuln Kurt Seifried (Sep 08)
- Re: Re: Python robotframework - tmp vuln Mikko Korpela (Sep 08)
- Re: Python robotframework - tmp vuln cve-assign (Sep 08)
- Re: Python robotframework - tmp vuln Kurt Seifried (Sep 08)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Python robotframework - tmp vuln Mikko Korpela (Sep 08)
- Re: Python robotframework - tmp vuln Kurt Seifried (Sep 07)