Bug 833742 (CVE-2012-2750) - CVE-2012-2750 mysql: unspecified flaw related to Optimizer
Summary: CVE-2012-2750 mysql: unspecified flaw related to Optimizer
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CANTFIX
Alias: CVE-2012-2750
Product: Security Response
Classification: Other
Component: vulnerability
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Red Hat Product Security
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: mysql-cpu-2012-07 833743
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-06-20 08:41 UTC by Tomas Hoger
Modified: 2019-09-29 12:53 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-12-11 13:06:33 UTC


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Novell 767849 None None None 2012-06-20 08:43:56 UTC

Description Tomas Hoger 2012-06-20 08:41:16 UTC
MySQL version 5.5.23 releases notes mention following security fix:

 * Security Fix: Bug #59533 was fixed.

 http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/news-5-5-23.html

Upstream bug is currently private and there's no additional info currently available for this issue.  The bug is not referenced by any commit in the upstream bazaar repositories.

  http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=59533

Comment 1 Tomas Hoger 2012-07-25 08:31:40 UTC
There's still no information available for this issue even after the released of Oracle July 2012 CPU:
  http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/cpujul2012-392727.html

Of the CVEs listed in the CPU, there's only one listed as fixed in 5.5.23:

  CVE-2012-1689  Server Optimizer  4.0/AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:N/A:P+

CVE-2012-1689 is also listed to affected 5.1 before 5.1.63.  We currently have no way to know if CVE-2012-1689 is a duplicate of CVE-2012-2750, whether CVE-2012-1689 was used to refer to more than one issue, or whether it's completely different issue and CVE-2012-2750 is not covered by upstream CPU at all.

Comment 2 Tomas Hoger 2012-08-03 09:44:35 UTC
CVE-2012-1689 has separate bug #841351.

Comment 3 Tomas Hoger 2012-10-31 13:57:30 UTC
As noted in comment #1, this is most likely a duplicate or subset of other CVE listed in Oracle July 2012 CPU.  However, Oracle refused to provide any additional details on the CVE, even limited to confirming which ids are duplicates.  Closing, as this can not be addressed.

Comment 4 Vincent Danen 2013-10-16 18:29:41 UTC
This is noted in the Oracle October 2013 CPU:

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/cpuoct2013-1899837.html#AppendixMSQL

and is noted as affecting the Optimizer sub-component.  As a result, I do not believe this is a duplicate (although, arguably, there's not much more information here than we had to begin with).

Comment 5 Tomas Hoger 2013-12-11 13:06:33 UTC
(In reply to Vincent Danen from comment #4)
> This is noted in the Oracle October 2013 CPU:
> 
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/cpuoct2013-1899837.html#AppendixMSQL
> 
> and is noted as affecting the Optimizer sub-component.

Note that the info in October 2013 CPU does not contradict info noted in comment #1 in any way:

- both CVE-2012-1689 and CVE-2012-2750 are listed as affecting Optimizer component
- both ids have the same CVSS score and vector
- both are listed as fixed in 5.5.23 (i.e. long before Oct CPU 2013)
- there is no fixed in version for 5.1 listed for CVE-2012-2750

> As a result, I do not believe this is a duplicate (although, arguably,
> there's not much more information here than we had to begin with).

Listing of CVE-2012-2750 in Oct CPU 2013 may well be an attempt to stop queries they get regarding the MySQL CVE that was not listed in any previous CPU without providing any useful information (e.g. by confirming relationship to CVE-2012-1689).

MySQL 5.5 shipped in Red Hat products - mysql55-mysql in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, and Red Hat Software Collections 1, are based on newer upstream MySQL versions (5.5.32 currently) and hence should have both CVEs fixed.  There's insufficient information available to know if MySQL 5.1 is fixed an in what version.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.