Debian: 'xtel' Potential symlink attack vulnerability

    Date05 Dec 2001
    CategoryDebian
    2474
    Posted ByLinuxSecurity Advisories
    The xtel (a X emulator for minitel) package as distributed with DebianGNU/Linux 2.2 has two possible symlink attacks.
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Debian Security Advisory DSA-090-1                   This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
    http://www.debian.org/security/                         Wichert Akkerman
    December  5, 2001
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    Package        : xtel
    Problem type   : symlink attack
    Debian-specific: no
    
    The xtel (a X emulator for minitel) package as distributed with Debian
    GNU/Linux 2.2 has two possible symlink attacks:
    
    * xteld creates a temporary file /tmp/.xtel- without checking
      for symlinks.
    * when printing a hardcope xtel would create a temporary file without
      protecting itself against symlink attacks.
    
    Both problems have been fixed in version 3.2.1-4.potato.1 .
    
    wget url
            will fetch the file for you
    dpkg -i file.deb
            will install the referenced file.
    
    
    Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 alias potato
    ---------------------------------
    
      Potato was released for alpha, arm, i386, m68k, powerpc and sparc.
    
      Source archives:
         http://security.debian.org/dists/stable/updates/main/source/xtel_3.2.1-4.potato.1.diff.gz
          MD5 checksum: 79575d2797c4b85fafba690f71ba97c4
         http://security.debian.org/dists/stable/updates/main/source/xtel_3.2.1-4.potato.1.dsc
          MD5 checksum: 036a3763efa51ff74baa14705b86974a
         http://security.debian.org/dists/stable/updates/main/source/xtel_3.2.1.orig.tar.gz
          MD5 checksum: 9cec4556d70194beb25086d8e14b9b20
    
      Alpha architecture:
         
    http://security.debian.org/dists/stable/updates/main/binary-alpha/xtel_3.2.1-4.potato.1_alpha.deb
          MD5 checksum: c288520adc2a519edb341c18d6b20572
    
      ARM architecture:
         
    http://security.debian.org/dists/stable/updates/main/binary-arm/xtel_3.2.1-4.potato.1_arm.deb
          MD5 checksum: 0114570b5bd6973f329e8477e7c25078
    
      Motorola 680x0 architecture:
         
    http://security.debian.org/dists/stable/updates/main/binary-m68k/xtel_3.2.1-4.potato.1_m68k.deb
          MD5 checksum: 46a9883023a1c897ee585b009d72ea92
    
      Intel IA-32 architecture:
         
    http://security.debian.org/dists/stable/updates/main/binary-i386/xtel_3.2.1-4.potato.1_i386.deb
          MD5 checksum: 325874239da03f93d0ff9039336d1231
    
      PowerPC architecture:
         
    http://security.debian.org/dists/stable/updates/main/binary-powerpc/xtel_3.2.1-4.potato.1_powerpc.deb
          MD5 checksum: 0299e89118646ef52579c1de1f56bcdd
    
      Sun Sparc architecture:
         
    http://security.debian.org/dists/stable/updates/main/binary-sparc/xtel_3.2.1-4.potato.1_sparc.deb
          MD5 checksum: 55f0f97fa3dbb4454f2933862333a84c
    
      These packages will be moved into the stable distribution on its next
      revision.
    
    For not yet released architectures please refer to the appropriate
    directory  ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/binary-$arch/ .
    
    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    apt-get: deb  http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main
    dpkg-ftp:  ftp://security.debian.org/debian-security dists/stable/updates/main
    Mailing list: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
    
    
    
    
    
    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":"13","type":"x","order":"1","pct":52,"resources":[]},{"id":"88","title":"Should be more technical","votes":"4","type":"x","order":"2","pct":16,"resources":[]},{"id":"89","title":"Should include more HOWTOs","votes":"8","type":"x","order":"3","pct":32,"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

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