Re: [CVE Requests] rsync and librsync collisions

[Loganaden Velvindron <loganaden () gmail com>]

On Sep 9, 2014 7:47 AM, "Murray McAllister" <mmcallis () redhat com> wrote:
> Good morning,
>
> The below still require a CVE or two (unless MITRE disagrees).

Have the details been made public yet ?
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Murray McAllister / Red Hat Product Security
>
>
> On 08/05/2014 04:03 PM, Michael Samuel wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think there should be CVEs assigned for this:
> >
> > rsync: MD5 collision DoS attack or limited file corruption
> > librsync: MD4 collision file corruption
> >
> > Note: librsync is not the same code, protocol or maintainer as rsync.
> >
> > The librsync attack is far easier to perform, since there's no
> > whole-file checksum and it will simply copy the first instance of a
> > collision into any place where the second collision is.
> >
> > The rdiff utility that ships with librsync truncates hashes to 8
> > bytes, allowing a very fast and efficient birthday attack - so even if
> > MD4 was replaced attacks would still be possible while the hash is
> > truncted.  This also affects duplicity - they both use
> > RS_DEFAULT_STRONG_LEN - so the _librsyncmodule that ships with
> > duplicity will need recompiling after the fix ships.
> >
> > Previous posting for context:
> > http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/07/28/1
> >
> > Regards,
> >    Michael