Glibc Patch for getaddrinfo() vulnerability
I have been seeing a lot about the newly discovered vulnerability in the glibc library which can be exploited (albeit with difficulty) by attackers.
Here is a (fire and brimstone) article on the subject:
http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/02/extremely-severe-bug-leaves-dizzying-number-of-apps-and-devices-vulnerable/
I understand the nature of the vulnerability, but I have to admit I get a bit lost when reading the patch solution. It seems that several steps need to be taken on the machine, but it says a "patch" is attached to the email.
Where is the patch exactly?
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-02/msg00416.html
I apologize, but I am not a Linux system engineer (aptitude and yum are my homeboys).
Unfortunately, I manage a few sites for clients mostly on Amazon linux which I have read may be susceptible as well - let's assume they are.
I just want to make sure I secure the boxes, I am probably capable of applying the patch, but I think i get confused by the glibc mail archive.
Can anyone shed some light on it - ie put it in a language us lowly front-end web devs can understand?
I know this is new/evolving I'm sure better docs will be available in the coming days.
Thanks in advance.
security glibc
add a comment |
I have been seeing a lot about the newly discovered vulnerability in the glibc library which can be exploited (albeit with difficulty) by attackers.
Here is a (fire and brimstone) article on the subject:
http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/02/extremely-severe-bug-leaves-dizzying-number-of-apps-and-devices-vulnerable/
I understand the nature of the vulnerability, but I have to admit I get a bit lost when reading the patch solution. It seems that several steps need to be taken on the machine, but it says a "patch" is attached to the email.
Where is the patch exactly?
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-02/msg00416.html
I apologize, but I am not a Linux system engineer (aptitude and yum are my homeboys).
Unfortunately, I manage a few sites for clients mostly on Amazon linux which I have read may be susceptible as well - let's assume they are.
I just want to make sure I secure the boxes, I am probably capable of applying the patch, but I think i get confused by the glibc mail archive.
Can anyone shed some light on it - ie put it in a language us lowly front-end web devs can understand?
I know this is new/evolving I'm sure better docs will be available in the coming days.
Thanks in advance.
security glibc
add a comment |
I have been seeing a lot about the newly discovered vulnerability in the glibc library which can be exploited (albeit with difficulty) by attackers.
Here is a (fire and brimstone) article on the subject:
http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/02/extremely-severe-bug-leaves-dizzying-number-of-apps-and-devices-vulnerable/
I understand the nature of the vulnerability, but I have to admit I get a bit lost when reading the patch solution. It seems that several steps need to be taken on the machine, but it says a "patch" is attached to the email.
Where is the patch exactly?
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-02/msg00416.html
I apologize, but I am not a Linux system engineer (aptitude and yum are my homeboys).
Unfortunately, I manage a few sites for clients mostly on Amazon linux which I have read may be susceptible as well - let's assume they are.
I just want to make sure I secure the boxes, I am probably capable of applying the patch, but I think i get confused by the glibc mail archive.
Can anyone shed some light on it - ie put it in a language us lowly front-end web devs can understand?
I know this is new/evolving I'm sure better docs will be available in the coming days.
Thanks in advance.
security glibc
I have been seeing a lot about the newly discovered vulnerability in the glibc library which can be exploited (albeit with difficulty) by attackers.
Here is a (fire and brimstone) article on the subject:
http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/02/extremely-severe-bug-leaves-dizzying-number-of-apps-and-devices-vulnerable/
I understand the nature of the vulnerability, but I have to admit I get a bit lost when reading the patch solution. It seems that several steps need to be taken on the machine, but it says a "patch" is attached to the email.
Where is the patch exactly?
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-02/msg00416.html
I apologize, but I am not a Linux system engineer (aptitude and yum are my homeboys).
Unfortunately, I manage a few sites for clients mostly on Amazon linux which I have read may be susceptible as well - let's assume they are.
I just want to make sure I secure the boxes, I am probably capable of applying the patch, but I think i get confused by the glibc mail archive.
Can anyone shed some light on it - ie put it in a language us lowly front-end web devs can understand?
I know this is new/evolving I'm sure better docs will be available in the coming days.
Thanks in advance.
security glibc
security glibc
edited 58 mins ago
Rui F Ribeiro
39.6k1479132
39.6k1479132
asked Feb 18 '16 at 2:34
7Elm7Elm
183
183
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
If you're using any reasonably well-supported distribution, you don't need the original patch itself. Most distributions would have updated libc by now, and pushed it to their repositories, and all you need to do is use the package manager to upgrade libc. (If they haven't done so by now, seriously consider switching distributions.) And this is indeed the case with Amazon Linux. From their security bulletins:
[C]ustomers using Amazon EC2 who’ve modified their configurations to
use non-AWS DNS infrastructure should update their Linux environments
immediately following directions provided by their Linux distribution.
EC2 customers using the AWS DNS infrastructure are unaffected and
don’t need to take any action.
For Amazon EC2 customers using Amazon Linux and who’ve modified their
configuration to use non-AWS DNS infrastructure:
A fix for CVE-2015-7547 has been pushed to the Amazon Linux AMI
repositories, with a severity rating of Critical. Instances launched
with the default Amazon Linux configuration on or after 2016/02/16
will automatically include the required fix for this CVE.
The patch if you want to look at it, is the part that begins with diff --git a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c in the email:
CVE-2015-7547
2016-02-15 Carlos O'Donell
[BZ #18665]
* resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c (gaih_getanswer_slice): Always set
*herrno_p.
(gaih_getanswer): Document functional behviour. Return tryagain
if any result is tryagain.
* resolv/res_query.c (__libc_res_nsearch): Set buffer size to zero
when freed.
* resolv/res_send.c: Add copyright text.
(__libc_res_nsend): Document that MAXPACKET is expected.
(send_vc): Document. Remove buffer reuse.
(send_dg): Document. Remove buffer reuse. Set *thisanssizp to set the
size of the buffer. Add Dprint for truncated UDP buffer.
diff --git a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
index a255d5e..47cfe27 100644
--- a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
+++ b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
@@ -1031,7 +1031,10 @@ gaih_getanswer_slice (const querybuf *answer, int anslen, const char *qname,
int h_namelen = 0;
if (ancount == 0)
- return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
+ {
+ *h_errnop = HOST_NOT_FOUND;
+ return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
+ }
...
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f263993%2fglibc-patch-for-getaddrinfo-vulnerability%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If you're using any reasonably well-supported distribution, you don't need the original patch itself. Most distributions would have updated libc by now, and pushed it to their repositories, and all you need to do is use the package manager to upgrade libc. (If they haven't done so by now, seriously consider switching distributions.) And this is indeed the case with Amazon Linux. From their security bulletins:
[C]ustomers using Amazon EC2 who’ve modified their configurations to
use non-AWS DNS infrastructure should update their Linux environments
immediately following directions provided by their Linux distribution.
EC2 customers using the AWS DNS infrastructure are unaffected and
don’t need to take any action.
For Amazon EC2 customers using Amazon Linux and who’ve modified their
configuration to use non-AWS DNS infrastructure:
A fix for CVE-2015-7547 has been pushed to the Amazon Linux AMI
repositories, with a severity rating of Critical. Instances launched
with the default Amazon Linux configuration on or after 2016/02/16
will automatically include the required fix for this CVE.
The patch if you want to look at it, is the part that begins with diff --git a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c in the email:
CVE-2015-7547
2016-02-15 Carlos O'Donell
[BZ #18665]
* resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c (gaih_getanswer_slice): Always set
*herrno_p.
(gaih_getanswer): Document functional behviour. Return tryagain
if any result is tryagain.
* resolv/res_query.c (__libc_res_nsearch): Set buffer size to zero
when freed.
* resolv/res_send.c: Add copyright text.
(__libc_res_nsend): Document that MAXPACKET is expected.
(send_vc): Document. Remove buffer reuse.
(send_dg): Document. Remove buffer reuse. Set *thisanssizp to set the
size of the buffer. Add Dprint for truncated UDP buffer.
diff --git a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
index a255d5e..47cfe27 100644
--- a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
+++ b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
@@ -1031,7 +1031,10 @@ gaih_getanswer_slice (const querybuf *answer, int anslen, const char *qname,
int h_namelen = 0;
if (ancount == 0)
- return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
+ {
+ *h_errnop = HOST_NOT_FOUND;
+ return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
+ }
...
add a comment |
If you're using any reasonably well-supported distribution, you don't need the original patch itself. Most distributions would have updated libc by now, and pushed it to their repositories, and all you need to do is use the package manager to upgrade libc. (If they haven't done so by now, seriously consider switching distributions.) And this is indeed the case with Amazon Linux. From their security bulletins:
[C]ustomers using Amazon EC2 who’ve modified their configurations to
use non-AWS DNS infrastructure should update their Linux environments
immediately following directions provided by their Linux distribution.
EC2 customers using the AWS DNS infrastructure are unaffected and
don’t need to take any action.
For Amazon EC2 customers using Amazon Linux and who’ve modified their
configuration to use non-AWS DNS infrastructure:
A fix for CVE-2015-7547 has been pushed to the Amazon Linux AMI
repositories, with a severity rating of Critical. Instances launched
with the default Amazon Linux configuration on or after 2016/02/16
will automatically include the required fix for this CVE.
The patch if you want to look at it, is the part that begins with diff --git a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c in the email:
CVE-2015-7547
2016-02-15 Carlos O'Donell
[BZ #18665]
* resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c (gaih_getanswer_slice): Always set
*herrno_p.
(gaih_getanswer): Document functional behviour. Return tryagain
if any result is tryagain.
* resolv/res_query.c (__libc_res_nsearch): Set buffer size to zero
when freed.
* resolv/res_send.c: Add copyright text.
(__libc_res_nsend): Document that MAXPACKET is expected.
(send_vc): Document. Remove buffer reuse.
(send_dg): Document. Remove buffer reuse. Set *thisanssizp to set the
size of the buffer. Add Dprint for truncated UDP buffer.
diff --git a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
index a255d5e..47cfe27 100644
--- a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
+++ b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
@@ -1031,7 +1031,10 @@ gaih_getanswer_slice (const querybuf *answer, int anslen, const char *qname,
int h_namelen = 0;
if (ancount == 0)
- return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
+ {
+ *h_errnop = HOST_NOT_FOUND;
+ return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
+ }
...
add a comment |
If you're using any reasonably well-supported distribution, you don't need the original patch itself. Most distributions would have updated libc by now, and pushed it to their repositories, and all you need to do is use the package manager to upgrade libc. (If they haven't done so by now, seriously consider switching distributions.) And this is indeed the case with Amazon Linux. From their security bulletins:
[C]ustomers using Amazon EC2 who’ve modified their configurations to
use non-AWS DNS infrastructure should update their Linux environments
immediately following directions provided by their Linux distribution.
EC2 customers using the AWS DNS infrastructure are unaffected and
don’t need to take any action.
For Amazon EC2 customers using Amazon Linux and who’ve modified their
configuration to use non-AWS DNS infrastructure:
A fix for CVE-2015-7547 has been pushed to the Amazon Linux AMI
repositories, with a severity rating of Critical. Instances launched
with the default Amazon Linux configuration on or after 2016/02/16
will automatically include the required fix for this CVE.
The patch if you want to look at it, is the part that begins with diff --git a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c in the email:
CVE-2015-7547
2016-02-15 Carlos O'Donell
[BZ #18665]
* resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c (gaih_getanswer_slice): Always set
*herrno_p.
(gaih_getanswer): Document functional behviour. Return tryagain
if any result is tryagain.
* resolv/res_query.c (__libc_res_nsearch): Set buffer size to zero
when freed.
* resolv/res_send.c: Add copyright text.
(__libc_res_nsend): Document that MAXPACKET is expected.
(send_vc): Document. Remove buffer reuse.
(send_dg): Document. Remove buffer reuse. Set *thisanssizp to set the
size of the buffer. Add Dprint for truncated UDP buffer.
diff --git a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
index a255d5e..47cfe27 100644
--- a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
+++ b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
@@ -1031,7 +1031,10 @@ gaih_getanswer_slice (const querybuf *answer, int anslen, const char *qname,
int h_namelen = 0;
if (ancount == 0)
- return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
+ {
+ *h_errnop = HOST_NOT_FOUND;
+ return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
+ }
...
If you're using any reasonably well-supported distribution, you don't need the original patch itself. Most distributions would have updated libc by now, and pushed it to their repositories, and all you need to do is use the package manager to upgrade libc. (If they haven't done so by now, seriously consider switching distributions.) And this is indeed the case with Amazon Linux. From their security bulletins:
[C]ustomers using Amazon EC2 who’ve modified their configurations to
use non-AWS DNS infrastructure should update their Linux environments
immediately following directions provided by their Linux distribution.
EC2 customers using the AWS DNS infrastructure are unaffected and
don’t need to take any action.
For Amazon EC2 customers using Amazon Linux and who’ve modified their
configuration to use non-AWS DNS infrastructure:
A fix for CVE-2015-7547 has been pushed to the Amazon Linux AMI
repositories, with a severity rating of Critical. Instances launched
with the default Amazon Linux configuration on or after 2016/02/16
will automatically include the required fix for this CVE.
The patch if you want to look at it, is the part that begins with diff --git a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c in the email:
CVE-2015-7547
2016-02-15 Carlos O'Donell
[BZ #18665]
* resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c (gaih_getanswer_slice): Always set
*herrno_p.
(gaih_getanswer): Document functional behviour. Return tryagain
if any result is tryagain.
* resolv/res_query.c (__libc_res_nsearch): Set buffer size to zero
when freed.
* resolv/res_send.c: Add copyright text.
(__libc_res_nsend): Document that MAXPACKET is expected.
(send_vc): Document. Remove buffer reuse.
(send_dg): Document. Remove buffer reuse. Set *thisanssizp to set the
size of the buffer. Add Dprint for truncated UDP buffer.
diff --git a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
index a255d5e..47cfe27 100644
--- a/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
+++ b/resolv/nss_dns/dns-host.c
@@ -1031,7 +1031,10 @@ gaih_getanswer_slice (const querybuf *answer, int anslen, const char *qname,
int h_namelen = 0;
if (ancount == 0)
- return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
+ {
+ *h_errnop = HOST_NOT_FOUND;
+ return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
+ }
...
answered Feb 18 '16 at 3:02
murumuru
1
1
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f263993%2fglibc-patch-for-getaddrinfo-vulnerability%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown