Bug 392551 (CVE-2007-6029)

Summary:	CVE-2007-6029 clamav code execution via unspecified vulnerability
Product:	[Other] Security Response	Reporter:	Tomas Hoger <thoger>
Component:	vulnerability	Assignee:	Red Hat Product Security <security-response-team>
Status:	CLOSED CANTFIX	QA Contact:
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	high
Version:	unspecified	CC:	extras-orphan, rh-bugzilla
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Security
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
URL:	http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2007-6029
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2008-04-25 09:06:02 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Tomas Hoger 2007-11-20 15:23:52 UTC

Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures assigned an identifier CVE-2007-6029 to the following vulnerability:

Unspecified vulnerability in ClamAV 0.91.1 and 0.91.2 allows remote
attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted e-mail message.
NOTE: this information is based upon a vague advisory by a
vulnerability information sales organization that does not coordinate
with vendors or release actionable advisories. A CVE has been assigned
for tracking purposes, but duplicates with other CVEs are difficult to
determine.

References:
http://wabisabilabi.blogspot.com/2007/11/focus-on-clamav-remote-code-execution.html
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/26463

Comment 1 Tomas Hoger 2007-11-20 15:29:18 UTC

According to referenced blog post, this is impact=critical vulnerability. 
However, without any details about vulnerability, there's probably not much we
or clamav upstream can do to properly address it...  So this bug was mainly
created for tracking purposes.

Comment 2 Tomas Hoger 2008-04-25 09:06:02 UTC

There's still not public information regarding this issue.  I'm closing CANTFIX,
as there's not a lot more we can do.

Other vendors seem to have taken the same approach:
http://security-tracker.debian.net/tracker/CVE-2007-6029
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=199823