From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] gnu: libtiff: Fix CVE-2016-{10092, 10093, 10094} and others. Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:33:16 -0500 Message-ID: <20170110223316.GB8431@jasmine> References: <3d2d557f00e78cde98d4b538e1315b809124df53.1484072055.git.leo@famulari.name> <8737gqzj3t.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59109) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cR4yo-0004nt-R2 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:33:23 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cR4yl-0007i3-Cq for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:33:22 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8737gqzj3t.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:43:34PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Leo Famulari skribis: > > > * gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-CVE-2016-10092.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-CVE-2016-10093.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-CVE-2016-10094.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-assertion-failure.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-divide-by-zero-ojpeg.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-divide-by-zero-tiffcp.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-divide-by-zero-tiffcrop.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-divide-by-zero.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-heap-overflow-pixarlog-luv.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-heap-overflow-tif-dirread.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-heap-overflow-tiffcp.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-heap-overflow-tiffcrop.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-invalid-read.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-null-dereference.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/libtiff-tiffcp-underflow.patch: New files. > > * gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Add them. > > * gnu/packages/image.scm (libtiff)[replacement]: New field. > > (libtiff/fixed): New variable. > > Impressive list (most from oss-sec on Jan. 1st, right?). Right, starting here: http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2017/q1/1 > I skimmed over the patches; some are obvious, others much less, but I > didn’t notice anything suspicious. I’d say go for it. I took some guidance from the Debian package versions 4.0.7-2 and 4.0.7-4: http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/main/t/tiff/tiff_4.0.7-4_changelog I can't find a web link to the Debian packaging tree, but you can get their patch series in the latest Debian tarball: http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/t/tiff/tiff_4.0.7-4.debian.tar.xz I generated the patches from CVS myself. The patch commentary should help anyone who wants to reproduce the patches. I found it difficult to name all the patches that haven't been assigned CVE IDs yet, as you might have noticed ;)