| Summary: | CVE-2016-7051 jackson-dataformat-xml: XmlMapper is vulnerable to SSRF attack | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Other] Security Response | Reporter: | Jason Shepherd <jshepherd> |
| Component: | vulnerability | Assignee: | Red Hat Product Security <security-response-team> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | unspecified | CC: | carnil, security-response-team |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Security |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2021-10-21 00:55:20 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Bug Depends On: | 1380205, 1380206 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 1378674 | ||
|
Description
Jason Shepherd
2016-09-23 03:47:22 UTC
Acknowledgments: Name: Adith Sudhakar Created jberet tracking bugs for this issue: Affects: fedora-all [bug 1380205] Created jackson-dataformat-xml tracking bugs for this issue: Affects: fedora-all [bug 1380206] Hi Is this a duplicate of CVE-2016-3720? Regards, Salvatore (In reply to Salvatore Bonaccorso from comment #5) > Hi > > Is this a duplicate of CVE-2016-3720? > > Regards, > Salvatore Good questions. Resetting NEEDINFO to amaris, he assigned CVE-2016-7051 in response to jsheppard, I've looked at the bugs but it's a bit convoluted. I've also emailed them to ensure they see this. These 2 issues are distinct. The first issues was about XXE, and was fixed with the change in line 115 here: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-dataformat-xml/blob/master/src/main/java/com/fasterxml/jackson/dataformat/xml/XmlFactory.java The second issue was about DTD, and was fixed with the change in line 117. Thanks for the clarification. |