Debian: New Version of zope released

    Date21 Aug 2000
    CategoryDebian
    2947
    Posted ByLinuxSecurity Advisories
    On versions of Zope prior to 2.2.1 it was possible for a user with theability to edit DTML to gain unauthorized access to extra roles during arequest. A fix was previously announced in the Debian zope package2.1.6-5.1, but that package did not fully address the issue and has beensuperseded by this announcement.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    
    - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Debian Security Advisory                             This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
    http://www.debian.org/security/                            Michael Stone
    August 21, 2000
    - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Package: zope
    Vulnerability type: remote unprivileged access
    Debian-specific: no
    
    On versions of Zope prior to 2.2.1 it was possible for a user with the
    ability to edit DTML to gain unauthorized access to extra roles during a
    request. A fix was previously announced in the Debian zope package
    2.1.6-5.1, but that package did not fully address the issue and has been
    superseded by this announcement. More information is available at 
    http://www.zope.org/Products/Zope/Hotfix_2000-08-17/security_alert
    
    Debian 2.1 (slink) did not include zope, and is not vulnerable. Debian
    2.2 (potato) does include zope and is vulnerable to this issue. A fixed
    package for Debian 2.2 (potato) is available in zope 2.1.6-5.2.
    
    wget url
            will fetch the file for you
    dpkg -i file.deb
            will install the referenced file.
    
    
    Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 alias slink
    - --------------------------------
    
      This version of Debian did not include zope and is not vulnerable.
    
    
    
    Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 alias potato
    - ---------------------------------
    
      Source archives:
        
    http://security.debian.org/dists/potato/updates/main/source/zope_2.1.6-5.2.diff.gz
          MD5 checksum: 2b2a0c23b842b5799520c57de2678292
        
    http://security.debian.org/dists/potato/updates/main/source/zope_2.1.6-5.2.dsc
          MD5 checksum: 04b8ff47d816bdeb5291e372e5e10006
     
    http://security.debian.org/dists/potato/updates/main/source/zope_2.1.6.orig.tar.gz
          MD5 checksum: 6ec4320afd6925c24f9f1b5cd7c4d7c5
      Alpha architecture:
        
    http://security.debian.org/dists/potato/updates/main/binary-alpha/zope_2.1.6-5.2_alpha.deb
          MD5 checksum: 0f7062e8a0b7449887cba647de996fda
      Arm architecture:
        
    http://security.debian.org/dists/potato/updates/main/binary-arm/zope_2.1.6-5.2_arm.deb
          MD5 checksum: 64ce5c2f0edb255ccc89b8006cc2f0d2
      Intel ia32 architecture:
        
    http://security.debian.org/dists/potato/updates/main/binary-i386/zope_2.1.6-5.2_i386.deb
          MD5 checksum: b105defbc9f1d66bb2cb89ef05b94d40
      Motorola 680x0 architecture:
        Will be available shortly
      PowerPC architecture:
        Will be available shortly
      Sun Sparc architecture:
        
    http://security.debian.org/dists/potato/updates/main/binary-sparc/zope_2.1.6-5.2_sparc.deb
          MD5 checksum: d1cefd0a6d40e3b1f00889b7b2d489a9
    
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.0.2 (GNU/Linux)
    Comment: For info see  http://www.gnupg.org
    
    iQCVAwUBOaEhTA0hVr09l8FJAQHnewQAnD5faWwqBRiDhUiIwOFRpBw5a3kdFifo
    yecN02T7daxX1hP8JJ9SFVwC+CvTax+rs+0pAhPDPljbiLy+ink0gGI8rGNffeZW
    qI+wvZRw3gdGynwYmP2c7ssiR3HyF6rh69DVZFeqytWnL3fS9IQi5HxdLTWP2tQi
    LcgLcGCht/Q=
    =6Ym9
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    
    You are not authorised to post comments.

    Comments powered by CComment

    LinuxSecurity Poll

    What do you think of the articles on LinuxSecurity?

    No answer selected. Please try again.
    Please select either existing option or enter your own, however not both.
    Please select minimum 0 answer(s) and maximum 3 answer(s).
    /main-polls/24-what-do-you-think-of-the-quality-of-the-articles-on-linuxsecurity?task=poll.vote&format=json
    24
    radio
    [{"id":"87","title":"Excellent, don't change a thing!","votes":"7","type":"x","order":"1","pct":58.33,"resources":[]},{"id":"88","title":"Should be more technical","votes":"3","type":"x","order":"2","pct":25,"resources":[]},{"id":"89","title":"Should include more HOWTOs","votes":"2","type":"x","order":"3","pct":16.67,"resources":[]}]["#ff5b00","#4ac0f2","#b80028","#eef66c","#60bb22","#b96a9a","#62c2cc"]["rgba(255,91,0,0.7)","rgba(74,192,242,0.7)","rgba(184,0,40,0.7)","rgba(238,246,108,0.7)","rgba(96,187,34,0.7)","rgba(185,106,154,0.7)","rgba(98,194,204,0.7)"]350
    bottom200

    Advisories

    We use cookies to provide and improve our services. By using our site, you consent to our Cookie Policy.