oss-sec mailing list archives
Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise
From: Marc Deslauriers <marc.deslauriers () canonical com>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:58:31 -0400
On 2024-03-29 19:49, Tavis Ormandy wrote:
On 2024-03-29, Marc Deslauriers wrote:I think we should have a policy that if issues are suspected to be actively exploited, that the issue goes public immediately. If even there is no patch or mitigation, there's not a lot of benefit to keeping it private.In this case, we had no reason to believe it was being actively exploited.Yeah... but you also have no reason to not believe that? What do you propose they were doing with their backdoor?
They were still attempting to get it into distros,
If you make it public before a patch or mitigation is available, it has now gone from a single entity being able to exploit it to the whole world being able to exploit it. That's a whole lot worse.Okay, but do we agree that if there is a mitigation available, it's better for it to be public? Isn't doing `dnf downgrade xxx` a mitigation, or `systemctl xxx stop`?
All we knew was that a payload was being attached to liblzma, it took a while to get the other details. We wanted to make sure it wasn't propagating to packages it compressed.
It wasn't obvious at the time that simply reverting to the previous version would be a complete solution, and I don't think telling everyone to stop ssh on all their servers and cloud instances is a viable mitigation at all.
I think everyone was acting in good faith here and did great work, but there wasn't a clear policy for handling this type of issue.I would argue against having a policy requiring something like this to be made public immediately. The important thing here is to do whatever it takes to make sure users are secure as fast as possible, not expose them to even bigger attack surface with no mitigation available. Marc.We all want users to be secure as fast as possible. The discussion is whether keeping backdoors embargoed helps achieve that.
It took a day to figure out what it was, what the impact was, and how to get it fixed, at which point there was agreement it shouldn't be keep embargoed. Nobody was pushing for it to be embargoed any longer than it needed to be.
Marc.
Current thread:
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise, (continued)
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Solar Designer (Mar 29)
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Andres Freund (Mar 29)
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Tavis Ormandy (Mar 29)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Andres Freund (Mar 29)
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Tavis Ormandy (Mar 29)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Liguori, Anthony (Mar 29)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Marc Deslauriers (Mar 29)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Russ Allbery (Mar 29)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Marc Deslauriers (Mar 29)
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Tavis Ormandy (Mar 29)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Marc Deslauriers (Mar 29)
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Tavis Ormandy (Mar 30)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Marc Deslauriers (Mar 30)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Marcin Wolcendorf (Mar 30)
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Tavis Ormandy (Mar 30)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Marc Deslauriers (Mar 30)
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Tavis Ormandy (Mar 30)
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Solar Designer (Mar 29)
- Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Bo Anderson (Mar 30)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Loganaden Velvindron (Mar 30)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Bjoern Franke (Mar 30)
- Re: Re: backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise Pierre-Elliott Bécue (Mar 30)