--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
icecat's CPE data is wrong |
|
Date: |
Wed, 10 Jul 2019 10:05:40 +0300 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) |
currently we have:
(cpe-name . "firefox_esr")
(cpe-version . ,(first (string-split version #\-)
and it should be:
(cpe-name . "firefox")
(cpe-version . ,(first (string-split version #\.)
however, this returns results for firefox@60, which I'm pretty sure
doesn't take into account that we're not running 60.0.0 but 60.8.0. With
the change 'guix lint -c cve iceat' returns:
icecat@60.8.0-guix1: probably vulnerable to CVE-2019-9788, CVE-2019-9789,
CVE-2019-9791, CVE-2019-9792, CVE-2019-9793, CVE-2019-9794, CVE-2019-9795,
CVE-2019-9796, CVE-2019-9797, CVE-2019-9798, CVE-2019-9799, CVE-2019-9801,
CVE-2019-9802, CVE-2019-9803, CVE-2019-9804, CVE-2019-9805, CVE-2019-9806,
CVE-2019-9807, CVE-2019-9808, CVE-2019-9809, CVE-2019-9810, CVE-2019-9813,
CVE-2018-12358, CVE-2018-12359, CVE-2018-12360, CVE-2018-12361, CVE-2018-12362,
CVE-2018-12363, CVE-2018-12364, CVE-2018-12365, CVE-2018-12366, CVE-2018-12367,
CVE-2018-12368, CVE-2018-12369, CVE-2018-12370, CVE-2018-12375, CVE-2018-12376,
CVE-2018-12377, CVE-2018-12378, CVE-2018-12379, CVE-2018-12381, CVE-2018-12383,
CVE-2018-12385, CVE-2018-12386, CVE-2018-12387, CVE-2018-12388, CVE-2018-12390,
CVE-2018-12391, CVE-2018-12392, CVE-2018-12395, CVE-2018-12396, CVE-2018-12397,
CVE-2018-12398, CVE-2018-12399, CVE-2018-12400, CVE-2018-12401, CVE-2018-12402,
CVE-2018-12403, CVE-2018-12405, CVE-2018-12406, CVE-2018-12407, CVE-2018-18492,
CVE-2018-18493, CVE-2018-18494, CVE-2018-18495, CVE-2018-18496, CVE-2018-18497,
CVE-2018-18498, CVE-2018-18499, CVE-2018-18500, CVE-2018-18501, CVE-2018-18502,
CVE-2018-18503, CVE-2018-18504, CVE-2018-18505, CVE-2018-18506, CVE-2018-18510,
CVE-2018-5150, CVE-2018-5151, CVE-2018-5152, CVE-2018-5153, CVE-2018-5154,
CVE-2018-5155, CVE-2018-5156, CVE-2018-5157, CVE-2018-5158, CVE-2018-5159,
CVE-2018-5160, CVE-2018-5163, CVE-2018-5164, CVE-2018-5166, CVE-2018-5167,
CVE-2018-5168, CVE-2018-5169, CVE-2018-5172, CVE-2018-5173, CVE-2018-5174,
CVE-2018-5175, CVE-2018-5176, CVE-2018-5177, CVE-2018-5179, CVE-2018-5180,
CVE-2018-5181, CVE-2018-5182, CVE-2018-5186, CVE-2018-5187, CVE-2018-5188
which just seems like too much.
--
Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
0001-gnu-icecat-Update-cpe-name.patch
Description: Text document
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug#36571: icecat's CPE data is wrong |
|
Date: |
Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:33:35 +0300 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) |
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 10:34:00PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> skribis:
>
> > currently we have:
> > (cpe-name . "firefox_esr")
> > (cpe-version . ,(first (string-split version #\-)
> >
> > and it should be:
> > (cpe-name . "firefox")
> > (cpe-version . ,(first (string-split version #\.)
> >
> > however, this returns results for firefox@60, which I'm pretty sure
> > doesn't take into account that we're not running 60.0.0 but 60.8.0. With
> > the change 'guix lint -c cve iceat' returns:
> > icecat@60.8.0-guix1: probably vulnerable to CVE-2019-9788, CVE-2019-9789,
> > […]
>
> Indeed, something seems to be wrong.
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> scheme@(guile-user)> ,use(guix cve)
> scheme@(guile-user)> (vulnerabilities->lookup-proc (current-vulnerabilities))
> fetching CVE database for 2019...
> fetching CVE database for 2018...
> scheme@(guile-user)> $2
> $3 = #<procedure 1f64baa0 at guix/cve.scm:268:2 (package #:optional version)>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (length ($2 "firefox" "60"))
> $4 = 107
> scheme@(guile-user)> (length ($2 "firefox" "60.8"))
> $5 = 0
> scheme@(guile-user)> (length ($2 "firefox" "60.5"))
> $6 = 0
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> Actually, the procedure returned by ‘vulnerabilities->lookup-proc’
> performs exact matches on version string. So “60” is _not_ equivalent
> to “60 or any 60.x version”.
>
> Here are the versions we see for one of these CVEs:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> scheme@(guile-user)> ,use(srfi srfi-1)
> scheme@(guile-user)> (find (lambda (vuln)
> (string=? (vulnerability-id vuln)
> "CVE-2019-9788"))
> (current-vulnerabilities))
> $9 = #<<vulnerability> id: "CVE-2019-9788" packages: (("thunderbird" …)
> ("firefox_esr" "60.5.0" "60.4.0" "60.3.0" "60.2.2" "60.2.0" "60.1.0" "60.0"
> "53.0.0" "52.9.0" …) ("firefox" "9.0.1" "9.0" "8.0.1" "8.0" "7.0.1" "7.0"
> "65.0" "64.0.2" "64.0" "63.0.3" "63.0.1" "63.0" "62.0.3" "62.0.2" "62.0"
> "61.0.2" "61.0.1" "61.0" "60.6.1" "60.5.0" "60.4.0" "60.3.0" "60.2.2"
> "60.2.1" "60.2.0" "60.1.0" …)>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> So IceCat probably corresponds to “firefox_esr”, but we got the CPE
> version string wrong: we should just strip the “-gnu*” suffix, nothing
> more.
>
> WDYT?
>
I was about to go and make the change but it seems that this is already
what we have. 'firefox_esr' and '(first (string-split version #\-))'. So
it looks like the vulnerability list just hasn't caught up with the
version we have now.
Closing as 'everything works as expected'
--
Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---