Bug 510503

Summary: gpg invalid packet error decrypting certain files
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Reporter: Casey Dahlin <cdahlin>
Component: gnupgAssignee: Tomas Mraz <tmraz>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Ondrej Moriš <omoris>
Severity: urgent Docs Contact:
Priority: urgent    
Version: 5.3CC: jwest, omoris, sgrubb, vanhoof
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: ZStream
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
URL: https://bugs.g10code.com/gnupg/issue537
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: gnupg-1.4.5-15 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 510500 Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-09-23 11:03:35 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:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 510500, 602669    
Attachments:
Description Flags
Reproducer (Top level of tar is NOT A DIRECTORY. Unpack carefully) none

Description Casey Dahlin 2009-07-09 14:31:54 UTC 
Created attachment 351079 [details]
Reproducer (Top level of tar is NOT A DIRECTORY. Unpack carefully)

Confirmed for RHEL 5 as well.

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #510500 +++

Created an attachment (id=351077)
Reproducer (Top level of tar is NOT A DIRECTORY. Unpack carefully)

Description of problem:
Decrypting certain data (length of message seems to be the determining factor) causes this error message:

gpg: [don't know]: invalid packet (ctb=14)

This patch seems to fix it for the customer:
http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-devel/2006-September/023180.html

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
gnupg-1.2.6-9

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Unpack the attached tar in a new folder
2. Run:
echo foobar | gpg -d --passphrase-fd 0 --homedir dot.gnupg --yes -o 2019.dat 2019.dat.gpg
  
Actual results:
Error message

Expected results:
The file is decrypted

Additional info:
Customer claims this also reproduces on RHEL 3 and 5. In the case of RHEL 5, I will clone the bug if I can reproduce it myself.
Comment 1 Nalin Dahyabhai 2009-07-13 18:29:55 UTC 
The patch used in 1.4.6 ended up being a bit different; we should use that one instead.  Has a bit of overlap with changes to fix CVE-2006-6235, so needs a bit of adjusting.
Comment 7 Tomas Mraz 2010-05-05 18:29:28 UTC 
Patch is here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510500#c3