From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: mupdf: Fix CVE-2016-8674.
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 14:45:12 +0200
Message-ID: <87shrjs2hz.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87twc0s73r.fsf@openmailbox.org> <20161025171235.GA4569@jasmine>
	<87lgxbanmm.fsf@netris.org> <874m3z7osh.fsf@openmailbox.org>
	<87y41bd4ha.fsf@duckhunt.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58596)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bzNa2-0007lC-PO
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:45:19 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bzNZz-0004qb-MZ
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:45:18 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87y41bd4ha.fsf@duckhunt.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
	(Marius Bakke's message of "Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:11:29 +0100")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com> skribis:

> I've modified the patch to apply to 1.9a, but it was far from trivial
> due to many context changes in upstream git. The attached patch makes
> mupdf build at least, and viewing PDF still works...
>
> The interdiff is rather unintelligible, so to verify this you should
> compare the final patch with the 1.9a sources.
>
> Ideally we should try and reproduce this vulnerability (and others!)
> after applying this patch, but I don't know how to use AFL.
>
> Another option is to simply package up the git version, as there appears
> to be no users of mupdf in the tree.
>
> WDYT, is this patch safe?

At first sight it appears to duplicate what the original patch was
doing, so that looks good to me.

> From c51f44edf3293aae323eded49dcba750f54607cb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 06:39:34 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: mupdf: Modify CVE-2016-8674 patch to apply to 1.9a.
>
> The fix from upstream did not apply cleanly due to many context changes.
> This was adapted by cloning mupdf 1.9a from git and fixing conflicts
> after applying our patches and cherry-picking upstream commit 1e03c06.
>
> * gnu/packages/patches/mupdf-CVE-2016-8674.patch: Adapt to 1.9a.

I=E2=80=99m in favor of you pushing this patch.

We can always adjust later if need be, but it=E2=80=99s better than keeping
mupdf broken.

Thank you!

Ludo=E2=80=99.