** Description changed:

  [ Impact ]
  
  Focal's libcrypto++ 5.6.4-9 regresses elliptic curve generation. Uploading
  this version from Debian appears to have been a mistake.
  
  This is a security regression, but was not published through the security
  pocket.
  
  As far as I am aware, Debian only packaged 5.6.4-9 in sid. Buster's latest
  version is 5.6.4-8: the version immediately before the regression.
  
  This version includes an _incomplete_ security patch for CVE-2019-14318
  which breaks elliptic curve arithmetic.
-  - https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/issues/869 states that this 5.6
-    security patch is incomplete.
-  - https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/issues/994#issuecomment-752399981
-    states that the 2019 patch (which 5.6 and 8.3.0 received) has a
-    regression.
+  - https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/issues/869 states that this 5.6
+    security patch is incomplete.
+  - https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/issues/994#issuecomment-752399981
+    states that the 2019 patch (which 5.6 and 8.3.0 received) has a
+    regression.
  
  See https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/issues/1269 and LP#2060564 for a
  deeper exploration of this Ubuntu Focal issue.
  
  The root cause of LP#1893934 appears to be caused by this regression. As
  reported on the urbackup forums, rolling back to the previous version
  solves this crash.
-  -  https://forums.urbackup.org/t/urbackupsrv-crashes-on-ubuntu-20-04/
+  -  https://forums.urbackup.org/t/urbackupsrv-crashes-on-ubuntu-20-04/
  
  [ Test Plan ]
  
  1. To test the regression:
  
- Compile and use @ek...@github.com's PoC (attached as main.cpp):
+ Compile and use @ekera[@]github.com's PoC (attached as main.cpp):
  ```
  $ g++ main.cpp -lcryptopp -o test
  $ ./test
  ```
  
  The PoC will report `X is *NOT* as expected.` on miscomputations.
  
  See https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/issues/1269
  
  Both Bionic 18.04.06 (libcrypto++ version 5.6.4-8) and Jammy 22.04.04
  (libcrypto++ version 8.6.0-2ubuntu1) had the expected result. Focal fails
  with 5.6.4-8. Rolling back the version allows the PoC test to past.
  
  2. Package tests:
  
  All package build tests pass regardless of the regression. Checking that
  new failures do not occur is a sanity test.
  
  To test builtin tests run: `cd /usr/share/crypto++ && cryptest v`
  
  X. Note:
  
  Unfortunately there are no autopkgtests.
  
  `reverse-depends -r focal src:libcrypto++` includes five, possibly minor,
  reverse dependencies.
  
  libcrypto++ is mostly used as a dependency outside of the Ubuntu Archive.
  i.e., we have low visibility on how this package is used.
  
- I am hoping that the PoC built in tests are enough to prove the sanity of
- this security regression SRU.
+ I am hoping that the PoC and built in tests are enough to prove the sanity
+ of this security regression SRU.
  
  [ Other Info ]
-  
- A big thank you to Martin Ekerå (@ek...@github.com) for identifying this
+ 
+ A big thank you to Martin Ekerå (@ekera[@]github.com) for identifying this
  issue and writing a thorough bug report and PoC on GitHub \o/
  
  This is my first SRU. I need a sponsor and help tagging on LP.
  
  I have performed the Test Plan.
  
  The fix solely involves on removing a d/patch file.
  
  Removing the patch causes the following (expected) symbol changes in
  ./usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libcrypto++.so.6.0.0:
  ```
  +CryptoPP::ProjectivePoint::~ProjectivePoint() W
  +std::vector<CryptoPP::ProjectivePoint, 
std::allocator<CryptoPP::ProjectivePoint> >::~vector() W
  +void std::vector<CryptoPP::ProjectivePoint, 
std::allocator<CryptoPP::ProjectivePoint> 
>::_M_realloc_insert<CryptoPP::ProjectivePoint 
const&>(__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<CryptoPP::ProjectivePoint*, 
std::vector<CryptoPP::ProjectivePoint, 
std::allocator<CryptoPP::ProjectivePoint> > >, CryptoPP::ProjectivePoint 
const&) W
  ```
  
  [ Where problems could occur ]
  
  Two systems both using software based on the regressed version of Crypto++
  *could possibly* communicate through incorrectly generated keys together.
  This seems unlikely and, if it is even possible, we should discourage or
  even break the use of miscalculated elliptic curves.
  
  A regression in reverting the regressed patch is possible.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2064751

Title:
  [SRU] revert security-regression in Focal's libcrypto++

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libcrypto++/+bug/2064751/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to