Bug 641276 (CVE-2010-3780)

Summary:	CVE-2010-3780 Dovecot: Busy master process, receiving a lot of SIGCHLD signals rapidly while logging, could die
Product:	[Other] Security Response	Reporter:	Jan Lieskovsky <jlieskov>
Component:	vulnerability	Assignee:	Red Hat Product Security <security-response-team>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Ales Zelinka <azelinka>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	unspecified	CC:	azelinka, kvolny, mhlavink, wnefal+redhatbugzilla
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:	2011-05-19 14:04:36 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:	654226
Bug Blocks:

Description Jan Lieskovsky 2010-10-08 08:49:25 UTC

Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures assigned an identifier CVE-2010-3780 to
the following vulnerability:

Dovecot 1.2.x before 1.2.15 allows remote authenticated users to cause
a denial of service (master process outage) by simultaneously
disconnecting many (1) IMAP or (2) POP3 sessions.

References:
[1] http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2010-3780
[2] http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2010-October/053450.html

Upstream changeset:
[3] http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.2/rev/e67b892c9ff3

Comment 1 Jan Lieskovsky 2010-10-08 08:52:09 UTC

This issue did NOT affect the versions of the dovecot package, as shipped
with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 and 5.

--

This issue does NOT affect the versions of the dovecot package, as shipped
with Fedora release of 12 and 13 (relevant packages are already updated).

Comment 4 Karel Volný 2011-01-26 16:27:49 UTC

do we have any realiable reproducer? - "Dovecot master process *could have* died if ..." doesn't sound too convincing to me

Comment 5 Michal Hlavinka 2011-01-27 08:00:18 UTC

(In reply to comment #4)
> do we have any realiable reproducer? - "Dovecot master process *could have*
> died if ..." doesn't sound too convincing to me

I'm not aware of such reliable reproducer. You'll need to have a lot of connections at the same time (in theory 3, but not with idle master process) and still there's only (medium) chance, no guarantee.

Comment 6 Karel Volný 2011-01-27 13:48:00 UTC

(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > do we have any realiable reproducer? - "Dovecot master process *could have*
> > died if ..." doesn't sound too convincing to me
> 
> I'm not aware of such reliable reproducer. You'll need to have a lot of
> connections at the same time (in theory 3, but not with idle master process)
> and still there's only (medium) chance, no guarantee.

thanks for the info

so this'd be SanityOnly, no testcase will be written

Comment 10 errata-xmlrpc 2011-05-19 11:47:07 UTC

This issue has been addressed in following products:

  Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6

Via RHSA-2011:0600 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-0600.html