| Summary: | CVE-2011-2501 libpng: regression of CVE-2004-0421 in 1.2.23+ | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Other] Security Response | Reporter: | Vincent Danen <vdanen> |
| Component: | vulnerability | Assignee: | Red Hat Product Security <security-response-team> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | unspecified | CC: | bnater, jlieskov, tgl |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Security |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | libpng 1.4.8beta04 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2012-07-18 08:58:33 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: | 717509, 717510, 717511, 717512, 717513, 721305, 721306 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 717086 | ||
|
Description
Vincent Danen
2011-06-27 22:34:45 UTC
Upstream fix is here: http://libpng.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=libpng/libpng;a=commitdiff;h=65e6d5a34f49acdb362a0625a706c6b914e670af This has been assigned CVE-2011-2501: http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2011/06/28/16 Created libpng tracking bugs for this issue Affects: fedora-all [bug 717509] Created libpng10 tracking bugs for this issue Affects: fedora-all [bug 717512] Affects: epel-6 [bug 717513] Created mingw32-libpng tracking bugs for this issue Affects: fedora-all [bug 717510] Affects: epel-5 [bug 717511] Just for the record, I'm planning to handle this and the other current libpng bugs, in RHEL6, by rebasing from libpng 1.2.44 to 1.2.46. I've diffed the tarballs and there is essentially no difference except version numbers and the security fixes we want. Indeed, the entire reason why upstream is still maintaining 1.2.x is to provide security fixes, so it would be a bit discourteous to them to not use their tarballs ... RHEL5 and back probably can't be handled that way, unfortunately. This issue has been addressed in following products: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Via RHSA-2011:1105 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-1105.html |