From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id C171C38582BC; Tue, 6 Jun 2023 12:24:47 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C171C38582BC DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1686054287; bh=xVa2AKRzsqPfBC+HBIVHnR7TcqdyHsMPXpHka1ywqJ8=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ItD5SK7FGiGoCXmcrlKX+xvrrWl+si9vIKawuO6IivMZOBOz/5fz/ZtNmaWAlAGvS 0Xh43zaYvvTV4QnhNbPjbIjvltpLkFPT5luKxAVi2FgWQ95dh4b2IElpsm+3hVZp3R NBeFYnsySbDeHBdpUnzkwFMpZ26hVGxbHpnYpunw= From: "helmut at subdivi dot de" To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug libc/18036] buffer overflow (read past end of buffer) in internal_fnmatch=>end_pattern with "**(!()" pattern Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2023 12:24:46 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: glibc X-Bugzilla-Component: libc X-Bugzilla-Version: 2.21 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: helmut at subdivi dot de X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ppluzhnikov at google dot com X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: security+ X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D18036 Helmut Grohne changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |helmut at subdivi dot de --- Comment #5 from Helmut Grohne --- While this bug has been tracked together with https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D18032 as CVE-2015-8984 e.= g. in RedHat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D1197730#c3, that's not universally the case and e.g. Debian missed this fix in Debian 8 while including the other. As such, I think it would be best to track these separately using separate CVE identifiers. Would you want to request one or should I request via the standard mitre interface? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=