-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
______________________________________________________________________________
SuSE Security Announcement
Package: Netscape, Versions 4.x, possibly others
Date: Wednesday, August 23rd, 2000 03:30 MEST
Affected SuSE versions: All
Vulnerability Type: remote file viewing, remote buffer overflow
Severity (1-10): 4, 7
SuSE default package: yes
Other affected systems: all linux systems using this package
Content of this advisory:
1) security vulnerability resolved: Netscape
problem description, discussion, solution and upgrade information
2) Correction/apology for perl thread, pending vulnerabilities,
temporary workarounds
3) standard appendix (further information)
______________________________________________________________________________
1) problem description, brief discussion, solution, upgrade information
Two security problems exist in the netscape package as shipped with
SuSE Linux distributions.
a) Improper verification in Netscape's jpeg processing code can lead
to a buffer overflow where data read from the network can overwrite
memory. As a result, arbitrary code from a remote origin could be
executed. The attack is particularly dangerous since it can penetrate
firewall setups. Netscape version 4.74 fixes (fixed) this
vulnerability.
b) Due to an error in the java implementation in Netscape, it is
possible for an attacker to view files and directories with the
priviledges of the user running Netscape if the user visits a
malisciously crafted webpage. This issue is known as "Brown
Orifice" and requires the user to have Java enabled in her browser
configuration. Again, this attack can penetrate firewall setups.
See http://www.brumleve.com/BrownOrifice for details.
Problem a) can be circumvented by disabling the automatic image
loading in Netscape's configuration.
The temporary workaround for problem b) is to disable Java in
Netscape's configuration menu (to protect against other
vulnerabilities, disable JavaScript, too!). Both countermeasures
may widely be found inacceptable.
SuSE provides an updated package for the vulnerable software. It is
strongly recommended to upgrade to the latest version found on our
ftp server as described below. The update package introduces
Netscape version 4.75, including the SuSE-specific libraries that fix
some of Netscape's "irregular" behaviour. Please note that
Netscape-4.75 is not available for the glibc-2.0-based SuSE
Distributions SuSE-6.0 and 6.1 because Netscape doesn't provide
any files for this glibc version. For these distributions, we
provide Netscape Version 4.74 which fixes problem a) only.
Alternatively, the package for the libc5-based SuSE-5.3
distribution can be used as well if the package 'shlibs5' is
installed. This is recommended, since the 5.3 package may be
faster and more reliable.
Download the update package as described below and install the
package with the command `rpm -Fhv file.rpm'. The md5sum for each
file is in the line below. You can verify the integrity of the rpm
files using the command
`rpm --checksig --nogpg file.rpm',
independently from the md5 signatures below.
Due to US-American export restrictions for cryptographical software,
we are unable to provide update packages on our US ftp server
ftp.suse.com. Instead, the packages can be found on ftp.suse.de. For
bandwidth reasons, please use our mirrors or our primary mirror
ftp.gwdg.de and follow the directory to your distribution.
Example: For SuSE-6.4 use the path
ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/6.4_update_de/xap1/netscape.rpm.
***********************************************************************
Please note that the path to netscape.rpm in the 6.0 and 6.1 update
directories point to Netscape version 4.74 which doesn't fix problem b!
See section above!
***********************************************************************
Further mirrors can be found at
http://www.suse.de/de/support/download/ftp/inland.html, but be
advised that not all sites mirror the German part of the update
directories.
md5sums for the i386 Intel Platform (the only one supported):
SuSE Versions 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 7.0:
70289f88b4c9fc1a9867ba7dac985982 netscape-4.75.glibc21.i386.rpm
SuSE Version 5.3 (libc5-based, probably faster, can be used on
glibc2-based systems if the package shlibs5 is installed)
679aaf67592244a07733bdabdab67729 netscape-4.75.libc5.i386.rpm
SuSE Version 6.0 and 6.1, Netscape-4.74 with incomplete fixes:
4bcc31fe37f7c8d226b437c1daa9b944 netscape-4.74.glibc20.i386.rpm
______________________________________________________________________________
2) Correction/Apology: In my posting to suse-security@suse.de and to
bugtraq@securityfocus.com about the suidperl thread, Subject: "SuSE
Security Announcement: suidperl (perl)", dated 10 Aug 2000, I wrote:
"A maliciously implemented feature causes the interpreter to spawn
the /bin/mail program to"..."
This is a bad and embarrassing mistake because of a confusion about
the word "maliciously" in this context - it was meant to read
"inconsiderate".
I apologize to the perl folks for this mistake.
Pending vulnerabilities in SuSE Distributions and Workarounds:
This section addresses currently known vulnerabilities in Linux/Unix
systems that have not been resolved yet as of the release date of
this advisory.
- ntop
ntop is a network statistics visualization utility which offers
graphical analysis of network traffic and other statistics with
a web browser. By default, ntop listens on port 3000 and requires
no or a commonly known authentication password to view the data.
ntop is only installed in network server selections and is not
activated by default in SuSE Linux installations.
The ntop packages shipped with SuSE Linux did not exhibit the
unsafe behaviour when a file like /../../etc/passwd is referenced.
However, Thomas Biege has reviewed the source of the package and
there are still some potential problems with the package that
require a major overhaul of the code.
Currently, we recommend to disable or even remove the ntop package
(`rpm -e ntop') in an environment where security considerations
play a role. More information on ntop can be found in
ntop's documentation directory /usr/doc/packages/ntop or
/usr/share/doc/packages/ntop for SuSE-7.0.
- zope
SuSE distributions before 7.0 do not contain zope as a package.
An updated package for the freshly released SuSE-7.0 is on the way.
- xchat
A fix for the URL handler vulnerabilty is in progress and will
be released within a few days. There is currently no effective
and easy workaround other than removing the package by hand
(`rpm -e xchat'). More information on xchat can be found in
xchat's documentation directory /usr/doc/packages/xchat or
/usr/share/doc/packages/xchat for SuSE-7.0.
- minicom
SuSE's minicom doesn't exhibit the problem with files created
belonging to group uucp because /usr/bin/minicom isn't installed
sgid uucp by default. Changing this to 2755 root.uucp (manually
and in /etc/permissions) doesn't show any defective behaviour
either.
- xlockmore: After a review of the relevant part of xlock's code
we've found that the format string parsing bug posted by
bind@SUBTERRAIN.NET on bugtraq on August 15th 2000 is not
critical wrt security. xlock drops all privs as soon as it could
get hold of the user's encrypted password (which is before it
crashes). Other encrypted passwords can't be found in xlock's
memory. Since xlock on SuSE distributions runs sgid shadow, it
can't dump a core file upon segmentation fault (search
/usr/src/linux/kernel/sys.c for "dumpable".) and also can't be
traced (/usr/src/linux/arch/i386/kernel/ptrace.c).
The bug will be fixed in future releases of the SuSE Linux
distribution.
The following packages are not contained in SuSE distributions.
Therefore, they do not impose any security risks on SuSE systems
unless an administrator installed (compiled) the vulnerable
software by hand.
- FlagShip permissions, from Narrow
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Due to US-American export restrictions for cryptographical software, we are unable to provide update packages on our US ftp server ftp.suse.com. Instead, the packages can be found on ftp.suse.de. For
The legal issues have been resolved: Here are the links to download
the SuSE Netscape update packages from our US-American ftp server:
SuSE-6.4
ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.4/xap1/netscape.rpm
70289f88b4c9fc1a9867ba7dac985982
SuSE-6.3
ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.4/xap1/netscape.rpm
70289f88b4c9fc1a9867ba7dac985982
SuSE-6.2
ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.4/xap1/netscape.rpm
70289f88b4c9fc1a9867ba7dac985982
SuSE-6.1, SuSE-6.0: We do _NOT_ provide Netscape packages of version
4.75 because there is no such version from netscape that is linked
against glibc2.0. We recommend to install the libc5 version from
SuSE-5.3 (which requires the package shlibs5 installed).
Netscape-4.74 (which fixes the security related bug in Netscape's
jpeg library) is available though. Since this version does not provide
a complete fix for Netscape's known security problems, we don't list
any links to this version. Interested parties may find the packages
at the corresponding places.
SuSE-5.3
ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/5.3/xap1/netscape.rpm
679aaf67592244a07733bdabdab67729
Thanks,
Roman.
- --
- -
| Roman Drahtmüller
Since upgrading Netscape on Suse 6.2 to 4.75 downloaded from ftp.suse.de I get an error message about the Acrobat reader not beeing able to locate libc5.so. It seems like Adobe has a newer version of the reader linked against libc6. Any plans about supplying the rpm of that? Selcuk On Thu, 24 Aug 2000, Roman Drahtmueller wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Due to US-American export restrictions for cryptographical software, we are unable to provide update packages on our US ftp server ftp.suse.com. Instead, the packages can be found on ftp.suse.de. For
The legal issues have been resolved: Here are the links to download the SuSE Netscape update packages from our US-American ftp server:
SuSE-6.4 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.4/xap1/netscape.rpm 70289f88b4c9fc1a9867ba7dac985982
SuSE-6.3 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.4/xap1/netscape.rpm 70289f88b4c9fc1a9867ba7dac985982
SuSE-6.2 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/6.4/xap1/netscape.rpm 70289f88b4c9fc1a9867ba7dac985982
SuSE-6.1, SuSE-6.0: We do _NOT_ provide Netscape packages of version 4.75 because there is no such version from netscape that is linked against glibc2.0. We recommend to install the libc5 version from SuSE-5.3 (which requires the package shlibs5 installed). Netscape-4.74 (which fixes the security related bug in Netscape's jpeg library) is available though. Since this version does not provide a complete fix for Netscape's known security problems, we don't list any links to this version. Interested parties may find the packages at the corresponding places.
SuSE-5.3 ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/5.3/xap1/netscape.rpm 679aaf67592244a07733bdabdab67729
Thanks, Roman. - -- - - | Roman Drahtm�ller
// "Caution: Cape does | SuSE GmbH - Security Phone: // not enable user to fly." | N�rnberg, Germany +49-911-740530 // (Batman Costume warning label) | - - Type Bits/KeyID Date User ID pub 2048/3D25D3D9 1999/03/06 SuSE Security Team
- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.3i
mQENAzbhLQQAAAEIAKAkXHe0lWRBXLpn38hMHy03F0I4Sszmoc8aaKJrhfhyMlOA BqvklPLE2f9UrI4Xc860gH79ZREwAgPt0pi6+SleNFLNcNFAuuHMLQOOsaMFatbz JR9i4m/lf6q929YROu5zB48rBAlcfTm+IBbijaEdnqpwGib45wE/Cfy6FAttBHQh 1Kp+r/jPbf1mYAvljUfHKuvbg8t2EIQz/5yGp+n5trn9pElfQO2cRBq8LFpf1l+U P7EKjFmlOq+Gs/fF98/dP3DfniSd78LQPq5vp8RL8nr/o2i7jkAQ33m4f1wOBWd+ cZovrKXYlXiR+Bf7m2hpZo+/sAzhd7LmAD0l09kABRG0JVN1U0UgU2VjdXJpdHkg VGVhbSA8c2VjdXJpdHlAc3VzZS5kZT6JARUDBRA24S1H5Fiyh7HKPEUBAVcOB/9b yHYji1/+4Xc2GhvXK0FSJN0MGgeXgW47yxDL7gmR4mNgjlIOUHZj0PEpVjWepOJ7 tQS3L9oP6cpj1Fj/XxuLbkp5VCQ61hpt54coQAvYrnT9rtWEGN+xmwejT1WmYmDJ xG+EGBXKr+XP69oIUl1E2JO3rXeklulgjqRKos4cdXKgyjWZ7CP9V9daRXDtje63 Om8gwSdU/nCvhdRIWp/Vwbf7Ia8iZr9OJ5YuQl0DBG4qmGDDrvImgPAFkYFzwlqo choXFQ9y0YVCV41DnR+GYhwl2qBd81T8aXhihEGPIgaw3g8gd8B5o6mPVgl+nJqI BkEYGBusiag2pS6qwznZiQEVAwUQNuEtBHey5gA9JdPZAQFtOAf+KVh939b0J94u v/kpg4xs1LthlhquhbHcKNoVTNspugiC3qMPyvSX4XcBr2PC0cVkS4Z9PY9iCfT+ x9WM96g39dAF+le2CCx7XISk9XXJ4ApEy5g4AuK7NYgAJd39PPbERgWnxjxir9g0 Ix30dS30bW39D+3NPU5Ho9TD/B7UDFvYT5AWHl3MGwo3a1RhTs6sfgL7yQ3U+mvq MkTExZb5mfN1FeaYKMopoI4VpzNVeGxQWIz67VjJHVyUlF20ekOz4kWVgsxkc8G2 saqZd6yv2EwqYTi8BDAduweP33KrQc4KDDommQNDOXxaKOeCoESIdM4p7Esdjq1o L0oixF12Cg== =pIeS - -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv
iQEVAwUBOaUdwHey5gA9JdPZAQFGnggAhmcQ4QdoLGgfzaA01D2x1rsGPd1SQQ/4 YEWs3yONMmgvDtoqYA2Ung+CfkDI8E7PE0PYe4QVRMj/K3+GvxiYeP1qrisQ/4pq t9873/t1Fq+YwShzSKgJaY8Q0FObZATAUluwUhAWeSk4oP8vlym9kkItWAzpsP3R vlDYT5IpxmC4hhcPyi0+lKOJrfH8MA42UqowiOJuq3Prlqp/UsMY2zAsbVHISJhB LLcE815iT37DrUaNmYuF2BSkdYD9JUf672/GAAKUp1+rEB/woJy0AMTlP/HC3Af5 tUWdB6tmtkV9QNMnBQ541EX9Rlqy6NsO43gyfYPRcLEPuacG+2H4mQ== =6+YB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: suse-security-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands, e-mail: suse-security-help@suse.com
<=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=> < Selcuk Ozturk <+> Email: > < MIS Deputy Director <+> sozturk@eMediaMillWorks.com > <=============================<#>===================================> < <+> eMediaMillWorks > < Phone : (301)883-2482 x121 <+> 1100 Mercantile Lane, Ste 119 > < Fax : (301)883-9754 <+> Largo, MD 20774 > <=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=><=>
Hi! When will SuSE release updated rpm's for the PGP vulnerability announced by CERT? Be well, Yuri. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- drs. Yuri Robbers phone : +31-71-527-4966 Leiden University fax : +31-71-527-4900 Institute for Theoretical Biology email : robbers@rulsfb.leidenuniv.nl Kaiserstraat 63 2311 GP Leiden PGP 5.0 public key available: the Netherlands Check your favourite hkp server. --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi, On Fri, 25 Aug 2000, Brian Galbraith wrote:
SuSE distributes only PGP 2.6.3 and GnuPG....none of which have the ADK vunerability.
Oops! *blush* You are right. I installed the newer PGP by hand... Thanks! Yuri. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- drs. Yuri Robbers phone : +31-71-527-4966 Leiden University fax : +31-71-527-4900 Institute for Theoretical Biology email : robbers@rulsfb.leidenuniv.nl Kaiserstraat 63 2311 GP Leiden PGP 5.0 public key available: the Netherlands Check your favourite hkp server. --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since upgrading Netscape on Suse 6.2 to 4.75 downloaded from ftp.suse.de I get an error message about the Acrobat reader not beeing able to locate libc5.so. It seems like Adobe has a newer version of the reader linked against libc6. Any plans about supplying the rpm of that?
Starting with SuSE-6.3, acroread is linked against glibc-2.1. Your package should work if you install the package shlibs5.rpm (and execute ldconfig if you install it using the rpm command). Regards, Roman.
Selcuk
--
- -
| Roman Drahtmüller
Brian, et al -- ...and then Brian Galbraith said... % % Yuri Robbers wrote: % > % > When will SuSE release updated rpm's for the PGP vulnerability announced % > by CERT? % > % SuSE distributes only PGP 2.6.3 and GnuPG....none of which have the ADK % vunerability. Please forgive the newbie from jumping in, but I believe that GPG *is* susceptible to this sort of attack when using any Version4 keys, including V4 RSA keys (and, since I haven't figured out how to get GPG 1.0.2 to use RSA V3 keys, that includes me). I get this from Ralf Senderek's paper at http://senderek.de/security/key-experiments.html in the Inevitable Conclusions section, wherein he recommends using GPG as an analysis tool but using pgp 2.6.3 as your only encryption/decryption tool. I realize that, if I have a DH key (as I do at the moment), nothing in the world can stop Joe Correspondent from getting a corrupted copy of my public key and using his PGP to encrypt to me as well as an attacker; all we can do is to ensure that he gets the real key from my and so on. I would love to be proven wrong in my understanding that GPG is also vulnerable to accepting and using a compromised key, since I like the GPG interface and key management much more than either modern or "older" PGP versions. If anyone has any information, please feel free to send it on to me! % % % Regards % % Brian :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) davidtg@bigfoot.com * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) davidtgwork@bigfoot.com http://www.bigfoot.com/~davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! The "new millennium" starts at the beginning of 2001. There was no year 0. Note: If bigfoot.com gives you fits, try sector13.org in its place. *sigh*
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, David T-G wrote:
Brian, et al --
...and then Brian Galbraith said... % % Yuri Robbers wrote: % > % > When will SuSE release updated rpm's for the PGP vulnerability announced % > by CERT? % > % SuSE distributes only PGP 2.6.3 and GnuPG....none of which have the ADK % vunerability.
Please forgive the newbie from jumping in, but I believe that GPG *is* susceptible to this sort of attack when using any Version4 keys, including V4 RSA keys (and, since I haven't figured out how to get GPG 1.0.2 to use RSA V3 keys, that includes me).
No, GPG is NOT!!! vulnerable, since it doesn't use the ADK mechanism. For a more detailed explanation check out the GNUPG homepage or the discussion lists. It's not even the V4 RSA standard that is flawed, but PGP's implementation of it.
I get this from Ralf Senderek's paper at
http://senderek.de/security/key-experiments.html
in the Inevitable Conclusions section, wherein he recommends using GPG as an analysis tool but using pgp 2.6.3 as your only encryption/decryption tool.
He mixes up two different things. It is possible to corrupt a gpg generated signature in the same way as a PGP generated signature (since both adhere to the V4 standard), but gpg will never use the false ADK when encrypting, or in fact ANY ADK. As long as you encrypt and decrypt with gpg you are not vulnerable.
I realize that, if I have a DH key (as I do at the moment), nothing in the world can stop Joe Correspondent from getting a corrupted copy of my public key and using his PGP to encrypt to me as well as an attacker; all we can do is to ensure that he gets the real key from my and so on.
I would love to be proven wrong in my understanding that GPG is also vulnerable to accepting and using a compromised key, since I like the GPG interface and key management much more than either modern or "older" PGP versions. If anyone has any information, please feel free to send it on to me!
Check out the gnupg discussion lists. The addresses can be found at www.gnupg.org. On the first line you can also find the following: --> Snip GnuPG is not vulnerable to the faked ARR (aka ADK) attack as PGP 5 and 6 is. The reason for this is that GnuPG does intentionally not handle those "additional recipients requests". BTW, those Big Brother packets are not defined in the OpenPGP standard - they are a proprietary PGP extension. --> Snap gr Stefan
Stefan Suurmeijer wrote:
Check out the gnupg discussion lists. The addresses can be found at www.gnupg.org. On the first line you can also find the following:
--> Snip GnuPG is not vulnerable to the faked ARR (aka ADK) attack as PGP 5 and 6 is. The reason for this is that GnuPG does intentionally not handle those "additional recipients requests". BTW, those Big Brother packets are not defined in the OpenPGP standard - they are a proprietary PGP extension. --> Snap
Yes, I DID check out the gnupg develop maillist.
Please correct me if I make a mistake, but I come to the following
conclusion:
gpg might be secure, but if anybody uses an insecure pgp-descendant to
encode to my public key, the ciphertext is not necessarily secure,
because
somebody might have inserted an ADK into my public key.
The possibility to modify signed keys seems to have dire consequences on
the "network of trust"-concept, which is central to pgp.
Rupert
--
Rupert Kittinger
I contacted Ralf Senderek on this point, since I had read in several places (Slashdot e.g.) that GnuPG was not vulnerable, whereas my distinct impression from reading Ralf's paper was that GnuPG *was* vulnerable. So I wrote him for confirmation. Here are his remarks re: GnuPG: It is the only software I saw putting a version4-self-signature on a RSA-key. So it helps to contaminate RSA-keys which would otherwise be fairly protected, when in oldstyle format. In the new format the RSA-key-ID will change and this is detectable. That should settle the question, IMHO. Best, Corvin On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 05:11:41PM +0200, Rupert Kittinger wrote:
Stefan Suurmeijer wrote:
Check out the gnupg discussion lists. The addresses can be found at www.gnupg.org. On the first line you can also find the following:
--> Snip GnuPG is not vulnerable to the faked ARR (aka ADK) attack as PGP 5 and 6 is. The reason for this is that GnuPG does intentionally not handle those "additional recipients requests". BTW, those Big Brother packets are not defined in the OpenPGP standard - they are a proprietary PGP extension. --> Snap
Yes, I DID check out the gnupg develop maillist.
Please correct me if I make a mistake, but I come to the following conclusion:
gpg might be secure, but if anybody uses an insecure pgp-descendant to encode to my public key, the ciphertext is not necessarily secure, because somebody might have inserted an ADK into my public key.
The possibility to modify signed keys seems to have dire consequences on the "network of trust"-concept, which is central to pgp.
Rupert
-- Rupert Kittinger
Department of Mechanics and Mechanisms Graz University of Technology Kopernikusgasse 24/III A-8010 Graz pgp-keyID: EB7E995C; get public key from http://www.openpgp.net/pgpsrv.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: suse-security-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands, e-mail: suse-security-help@suse.com
--
Corvin Russell
Hi, On Fri, 25 Aug 2000, Selcuk Ozturk wrote:
Since upgrading Netscape on Suse 6.2 to 4.75 downloaded from ftp.suse.de I get an error message about the Acrobat reader not beeing able to locate libc5.so. It seems like Adobe has a newer version of the reader linked against libc6. Any plans about supplying the rpm of that?
The acroread RPM from SuSE Linux 6.4 already contains the new glibc version. It should install on SuSE 6.2 as well. Also have a look at http://sdb.suse.de/sdb/en/html/jd_acrobat.html Bye, LenZ -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Lenz Grimmer SuSE GmbH mailto:grimmer@suse.de Schanzaeckerstr. 10 http://www.suse.de/~grimmer/ 90443 Nuernberg, Germany Tax Shelter- A way to spend a buck to save fifty cents.
participants (9)
-
Brian Galbraith
-
Corvin Russell
-
David T-G
-
Lenz Grimmer
-
Roman Drahtmueller
-
Rupert Kittinger
-
Selcuk Ozturk
-
Stefan Suurmeijer
-
Yuri Robbers