Bug 736593

Summary:	httpd: RHSA-2011:1245 regressions [rhel-5]
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5	Reporter:	Tomas Hoger <thoger>
Component:	httpd	Assignee:	Joe Orton <jorton>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	BaseOS QE Security Team <qe-baseos-security>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	5.7	CC:	bugreports2005, mfuruta, prc, rdassen, sven, syeghiay, wnefal+redhatbugzilla
Target Milestone:	rc	Keywords:	Regression
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2011-10-20 16:56:41 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 2011-09-08 08:00:26 UTC

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #736592 +++

Description of problem:
RHSA-2011:1245 provided a fix for CVE-2011-3192, which significantly changed Ranges handling code and resulted in few regressions:

suffix-byte-range-spec ("-" suffix-length) were handled as equivalent to 0-suffix-length, resulting in the first suffix-length + 1 bytes being returned, rather than last suffix-length bytes.  Reported upstream in:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51748

httpd did not return 416 error when all specified ranges were unsatisfiable. This can happen if range specification is syntactically incorrect, or if first-byte-pos is behind the end of the file.

The fix as applied to upstream 2.2.x SVN branch:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1165607

Comment 5 bugreports2005 2011-10-12 09:10:32 UTC

According to comment 32 of Bug #732928, the server also wrongly returns 200 OK when 206 Partial is expected.

I think we are being hit by this, and I don't see a mention of it above. Should there be one?

Comment 6 Tomas Hoger 2011-10-13 14:14:38 UTC

(In reply to comment #5)
> According to comment 32 of Bug #732928, the server also wrongly returns 200 OK
> when 206 Partial is expected.

Also noted in:
  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=736592#c6

Behaviour for that case has been changed upstream several times:
  http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1163833
  http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1165062
  http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1175980

Comment 8 bugreports2005 2011-10-19 11:39:50 UTC

I see, but is it also desirable that a security patch changes functionality in an otherwise frozen release downstream?

Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2011-10-20 16:56:41 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-1392.html