From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: OpenSSL CVE-2016-2177, CVE-2016-2178
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 14:13:25 +0200
Message-ID: <87vb1cezoa.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20160612012201.GA23504@jasmine> <87pormi14c.fsf@gnu.org>
	<20160613202759.GA11755@jasmine>
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]:34061)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bCnDo-0007oz-OR
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 08:13:33 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bCnDk-0002MG-HQ
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 08:13:31 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20160613202759.GA11755@jasmine> (Leo Famulari's message of "Mon,
	13 Jun 2016 16:27:59 -0400")
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: Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:

> On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 10:49:23PM +0200, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:
>> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
>> > CVE-2016-2177
>> > http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2016/q2/500
>> >
>> > CVE-2016-2178
>> > http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2016/q2/493
>> >
>> > Should we try cherry-picking the upstream commits from the OpenSSL
>> > development repo?
>>=20
>> Sounds like it.  Could you look into it?
>
> I've attached my patch.
>
> According to OpenSSL's security policy [0], they seem to consider these
> bugs to be "LOW severity", since they did not keep them private or issue
> a new release, or even an advisory [1].
>
> There is also some discussion of the severity in this thread:
> http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2016/q2/493
>
> So, perhaps it's not worth the risk of cherry-picking these commits out
> of context, at least not without asking the upstream maintainers.
>
> Thoughts?

I don=E2=80=99t feel qualified to judge the severity of the bug (they do se=
em
hard to exploit, but I=E2=80=99m no expert.)

Since you=E2=80=99ve already done the work, I think we should simply apply =
those
fixes.

Makes sense?

Thank you!

Ludo=E2=80=99.