Is CVE-2024-30203 bogus?

[Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1052 bytes --]

Hello Ihor,

The description for CVE-2024-30203 is

    In Emacs before 29.3, Gnus treats inline MIME contents as trusted.

and for CVE-2024-30204 is

    In Emacs before 29.3, LaTeX preview is enabled by default for e-mail
    attachments.

but I think these commits

* ccc188fcf98..: Ihor Radchenko 2024-02-20 * lisp/files.el
  (untrusted-content): New variable.
* 937b9042ad7..: Ihor Radchenko 2024-02-20 * lisp/gnus/mm-view.el
  (mm-display-inline-fontify): Mark contents untrusted.
* 6f9ea396f49..: Ihor Radchenko 2024-02-20 org-latex-preview: Add
  protection when `untrusted-content' is non-nil

fix only a single problem, right?  But we have two CVEs.

It seems to me that either

- CVE-2024-30203 is just bogus, based on a misunderstanding by the CVEs
  assigner of exactly what the vulnerabilities were

- CVE-2024-30203 is legitimate, and we have only fixed one possible way
  in which Gnus treats inline MIME content as trusted.

I think it's the first one -- can you confirm?

Thanks.

-- 
Sean Whitton

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 869 bytes --]