Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 18:07:27 +0200 From: Jille Timmermans <jille@quis.cx> To: Andrew Storms <astorms@ncircle.com> Cc: "freebsd-security@freebsd.org" <freebsd-security@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Question on recent PHP VuXML info Message-ID: <48C54DBF.3070000@quis.cx> In-Reply-To: <C4EA93ED.1AD025%astorms@ncircle.com> References: <C4EA93ED.1AD025%astorms@ncircle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andrew Storms wrote: > Not sure if this is the correct place for VuXML questions, but the FreeBSD > VuXML list ( http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-vuxml/) looks pretty > dead given the last update was in 2007 according to the archives. > > We were previously tracking this entry, which pretty much sat for a while > without an applicable upgradeable resolution available. > > Affected package: php5-posix-5.2.6 > Type of problem: php -- input validation error in posix_access function. > Reference: > <http://www.FreeBSD.org/ports/portaudit/ee6fa2bd-406a-11dd-936a-0015af872849 > .html> > > ----------- > > Then late last week, the same VuXML ID started reporting this information > instead: > > Affected package: php5-5.2.6 > Type of problem: php -- input validation error in safe_mode. > Reference: > <http://www.FreeBSD.org/ports/portaudit/ee6fa2bd-406a-11dd-936a-0015af872849 > .html> > > ------------ > > > The generic question I'm asking is: What happened and why? Seems to me that > if you have a VuXML ID (which, I thought wasn't suppose to be re-used), then > it's name and description shouldn't just apparently change one day. There was an input validation bug in a function that was used in all posix_ functions that used files (http://../ ended up in /) which bypassed safe_mode. > > So is the prior "php5-posix-5.2.6" and the now "php5-5.2.6" with same ID, > the same bug, a new description, does the newer supercede, etc, etc? Where > can I get the background on what went on here? It was only in the posix module, not in entire PHP. ale@ took the fixing patch from PHP-cvs and attached it as a patch to the port a few days ago (or at least committed it) Afaik the vuxml also updated then; and I think ale@ took a look at the patch and changed the vuxml to say the portrevision with that patch wasn't vulnerable anymore, and also clearified the description. -- Jille > > Thanks. > > -_S > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48C54DBF.3070000>