Summary: | publicly exports dm key information | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | udisks | Reporter: | Martin Pitt <martin.pitt> |
Component: | detection | Assignee: | David Zeuthen (not reading bugmail) <zeuthen> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | major | ||
Priority: | medium | CC: | mbiebl |
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
i915 platform: | i915 features: |
Description
Martin Pitt
2010-04-06 09:32:12 UTC
I committed a test for this, which fails right now: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/udisks/commit/?id=4670d2edfb615af94bd9d82d8fd12b7cf8d23b9d ====================================================================== FAIL: LUKS create/teardown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "tests/run", line 735, in test_0_create_teardown self.failIf('essiv:sha' in out, 'key information in udev properties') AssertionError: key information in udev properties (In reply to comment #0) > So we should drop the key information for UDISKS_DM_TARGETS_TYPE == "crypt" or > only explicitly set major/minor/offset, and/or not set UDISKS_DM_TARGETS_TYPE > for anything != "linear". How about just keeping it for linear mappings for the time being? In the future we can keep it for other device mapper targets as well - for example, we want this data for multipath in order to display state about each path etc. etc. etc. Before I go and touch any code, I added a new test case which exercises this code path by ensuring that DM partitions (kpartx'ed on a LV) have a correct PartitionSlave property (it involves parsing UDISKS_DM_TARGETS_PARAMS and various DM_* properties). When I disable the UDISKS_DM_TARGETS_PARAMS reading in udisks-part-id, this test case fails. (In reply to comment #2) > How about just keeping it for linear mappings for the time being? Works for me. Now that I have test cases for both ends, I'll work on that tomorrow (bedtime now). Thanks! David, I think it's worth pushing out an 1.0.1 with this fix (I also made a couple of other fixes in trunk). Or do you want to wait for the CVE to arrive? (Someone requested one, as far as I understood from #udev). From: Josh Bressers 4/7/10 7:08 PM Re: [oss-security] CVE Request -- udisks v1.0.0 -- (serious)information disclosure Please use CVE-2010-1149 for this. Thanks. -- JB |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.