Bug 586064
| Summary: | cacti: arbitrary command injection vulnerability | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Other] Security Response | Reporter: | Vincent Danen <vdanen> |
| Component: | vulnerability | Assignee: | Red Hat Product Security <security-response-team> |
| Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | unspecified | CC: | mmcgrath, ocs2, plautrba |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Security |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2010-06-29 13:36:28 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
Vincent Danen
2010-04-26 18:17:58 UTC
I can't reproduce this, tried with 0.8.7e-3.fc12. I've tried variations of the original, but can't seem to get this to actually do anything useful. /var/log/cacti/cacti.log is full of entries like this (from trying to reproduce): 04/26/2010 05:17:11 PM - CMDPHP: Poller[0] WARNING: UDP Ping Error: gethostbyname failed for 172.12.12.12;touch /tmp/test 04/26/2010 05:18:35 PM - CMDPHP: Poller[0] WARNING: UDP Ping Error: gethostbyname failed for notarealipaddress;touch /tmp/test 04/26/2010 05:25:55 PM - CMDPHP: Poller[0] WARNING: UDP Ping Error: gethostbyname failed for google.ca;touch /tmp/test 04/26/2010 05:50:06 PM - CMDPHP: Poller[0] WARNING: UDP Ping Error: gethostbyname failed for google.ca";touch /tmp/test; " There have been fixes in the past for Cacti to fix this type of vulnerability, so I wonder whether or not this report is genuinely against the new version or perhaps against the older vulnerable versions. Is anyone else able to reproduce this? However, this looks like the same kind of issue as CVE-2009-4112 (bug #542985), which indicates: "Cacti developers say: > There is no effective way to fix the data input method without > breaking Cacti. It will be reviewed for the release of 0.8.8." We had classified that CVE as impact=low; do we want to call this impact=important considering this is a similar type of issue? *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 609115 *** |