From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] gnu: libtiff: Fix CVE-2016-{10092, 10093,
	10094} and others.
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 22:43:34 +0100
Message-ID: <8737gqzj3t.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <3d2d557f00e78cde98d4b538e1315b809124df53.1484072055.git.leo@famulari.name>
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]:36546)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1cR4Cj-0000FC-Hj
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 16:43:42 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1cR4Cf-0001Lp-J8
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 16:43:41 -0500
In-Reply-To: <3d2d557f00e78cde98d4b538e1315b809124df53.1484072055.git.leo@famulari.name>
	(Leo Famulari's message of "Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:14:16 -0500")
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:

> * 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?).

I skimmed over the patches; some are obvious, others much less, but I
didn=E2=80=99t notice anything suspicious.  I=E2=80=99d say go for it.

Thanks *a lot* for taking the time to prepare this patch!

Ludo=E2=80=99.