Update Information from Qualys

[exim-website.git] / templates / static / doc / security / CVE-2020-qualys / patches2.txt

diff --git a/templates/static/doc/security/CVE-2020-qualys/patches2.txt b/templates/static/doc/security/CVE-2020-qualys/patches2.txt
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..330e7dc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/templates/static/doc/security/CVE-2020-qualys/patches2.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+Hi Phil, all,
+
+> We will review the remaining commits tomorrow.
+
+========================================================================
+commit c5017adfb3d157cbaf12e91d693ea8c5ebc5b9fb
+
+    SECURITY: fix SMTP verb option parsing
+
+This fixes the vulnerability that we reported. This function is still
+very fragile; if you wish to harden it further, the following lines must
+make sure that they do not access or move a pointer out-of-bounds (i.e.,
+below smtp_cmd_data):
+
+uschar *v = smtp_cmd_data + Ustrlen(smtp_cmd_data) - 1;
+
+while (isspace(*v)) v--;
+
+  while(isalpha(n[-1])) n--;
+
+Right now we are unable to exploit these because 1/ smtp_read_command()
+strips spaces from smtp_cmd_data and 2/ we are unable to store an alpha
+or a space at smtp_cmd_data[-1] (the last character of smtp_cmd_buffer).
+
+For example, these two lines can read out-of-bounds (at
+smtp_cmd_data[-1]) despite the fixes:
+
+  while(isalpha(n[-1])) n--;
+
+  if (!isspace(n[-1])) return FALSE;
+
+The 2/ is pure luck, because smtp_cmd_data[-1] is the last character of
+smtp_cmd_buffer, which is allocated with store_get_perm(), which is not
+initialized: smtp_cmd_data[-1] could be anything, but we failed to store
+an alpha or a space there (this does not mean it is impossible). So this
+should probably be fixed at some point.
+
+========================================================================
+commit 4715403ea66aedcf1e0dde61ae483bf3ac3a071f
+
+    SECURITY: rework BDAT receive function handling
+
+This clearly simplifies the BDAT state/stack. Maybe add a
+lwr_receive_getc == NULL check in bdat_pop_receive_functions() (and
+LOG_PANIC_DIE if it is NULL) to avoid a NULL pointer dereference later
+(in case BDAT gets confused somehow)?
+
+========================================================================
+
+Thank you very much! We are at your disposal for questions, comments,
+and further discussions.
+
+With best regards,
+
+-- 
+the Qualys Security Advisory team