Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

For bugs related to Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 product line. For Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 and above, please visit Red Hat JIRA https://issues.redhat.com/secure/CreateIssue!default.jspa?pid=12332745 to report new issues.

Bug 153319

Summary:	CAN-2005-0472 Gaim DoS
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1	Reporter:	Josh Bressers <bressers>
Component:	gaim	Assignee:	Warren Togami <wtogami>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	2.1	Keywords:	Security
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:	impact=important,public=20050217,source=debian,reported=20050402
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2005-05-11 08:24:21 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 Josh Bressers 2005-04-04 19:17:09 UTC

We initially thought CAN-2005-0472 didn't affect RHEL2.1.  It however does.

http://gaim.sourceforge.net/security/index.php?id=10

Comment 1 Warren Togami 2005-04-08 06:04:20 UTC

While looking at the package, I discovered that Patch0: gaim-0.59.1-args.patch
was not being applied by accident.  It prevents an overflow into the command,
but it doesn't look like it had security implications.  Not sure.  Upstream has
it here:

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/gaim/gaim/src/Attic/browser.c  Revision
1.23.2.3 "Thanks Chris Blizzard.  I think that maybe in the future we'll make
Gaim not have any bugs."

http://devserv.devel.redhat.com/~wtogami/Changelog-0.59.9
It appears that upstream made several more 0.59.x maintenance releases after the
0.59.1 that we ship.  The same spec that I checked into CVS works with 0.59.9
after removing patch0 which was included in 0.59.2.  Should we ship 0.59.9
instead of 0.59.1 in RHEL2.1?  You decide.  

I am unable to test these binaries locally.

Comment 2 Warren Togami 2005-04-09 05:23:55 UTC

gaim-0.59.9-1.el2 has been mkerrata'ed.  Let me know if you need anything else.

Comment 3 Warren Togami 2005-04-29 05:35:54 UTC

ping bressers

Comment 5 Mark J. Cox 2005-05-11 08:24:22 UTC

An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on the solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-432.html