oss-sec mailing list archives

Re: CVE request for wget


From: Austin English <austinenglish () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 19:55:02 -0500

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:52 AM, Andreas Stieger <astieger () suse com> wrote:
Hello,

On 09/07/2015 10:39 PM, Austin English wrote:
This was reported to tails-dev [1] and other places [2] and is fixed
upstream [3].

I've rebased the patch for 1.13.4 (attached), which is the current
version in Debian wheezy [4] that Tails is based on.

Please keep me in CC, as I'm not subscribed.

[1] https://mailman.boum.org/pipermail/tails-dev/2015-August/009370.html
[2] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-wget/2015-08/msg00020.html
[3] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/wget.git/commit/?id=075d7556964f5a871a73c22ac4b69f5361295099
[4] https://packages.debian.org/wheezy/wget

To reproduce:

A $> nc -lv 8020
B $> wget ftp://A:8020

On A keep entering "200 ok", the following will be printed:

$ wget ftp://dexter:8020 > --2015-09-08 17:11:30-- ftp://dexter:8020/ > =>
‘.listing’ > Resolving dexter (dexter)... 10.160.4.160 > Connecting to
dexter (dexter)|10.160.4.160|:8020... connected. > Logging in as
anonymous ... Logged in! > ==> SYST ... done. ==> PWD ... done. > ==>
TYPE I ... done. ==> CWD not needed. > ==> PASV ... > Cannot parse PASV
response. > ==> PORT ...

On the server side:

$ nc -lv 8020 > Connection from 10.160.4.160 port 8020 [tcp/intu-ec-svcdisc] accepted
200 ok > USER anonymous > 200 ok > SYST > 200 ok > PWD > 200 ok > TYPE
I > 200 ok > PASV > 200 ok > PORT 10,160,4,160,134,42
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^

This would affect IP users connecting through a privacy proxy or VPN,
leaking their public IP address if they are otherwise connected without
NAT. For users connecting without such a proxy but through NAT, it leaks
the internal IP address.

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=944858

Andreas

--
Andreas Stieger <astieger () suse com>
Project Manager Security
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)

Ping. It's been over two weeks, I was hoping to have a CVE for this by now :)

-- 
-Austin


Current thread: