Skip to content

Vulnerability in trust-dns and trust-dns-server#1703

Merged
Shnatsel merged 1 commit into
rustsec:mainfrom
jonasbb:trust-dns-2023
Jun 3, 2023
Merged

Vulnerability in trust-dns and trust-dns-server#1703
Shnatsel merged 1 commit into
rustsec:mainfrom
jonasbb:trust-dns-2023

Conversation

@jonasbb

@jonasbb jonasbb commented Jun 3, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

An attacker can form packet loops between vulnerable instances, leading to a denial-of-service for both network and CPU resources.

My supervisor (@crossow) and I found and reported the issue. @bluejekyll and @djc have acknowledged and resolved the issue.

Questions:

  1. The same advisory should apply to both trust-dns and trust-dns-server. Is there a way to have a single advisory (i.e., single identifier) target multiple crates?
  2. Affected is the type trust_dns_server::server::ServerFuture, not a specific public function. It seems that cannot be encoded via [affected].

An attacker can form packet loops between vulnerable instances leading
to a denial-of-service for both network and CPU resources.
@Shnatsel

Shnatsel commented Jun 3, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Thank you!

On 1: There is currently no way to make a single advisory affect two different crates. If both crates contain vulnerable code, then there should be two advisories. It's fine if they contain the same text.

On 2: That is indeed correct, so [affected] is not applicable here.

@Shnatsel
Shnatsel merged commit a14884e into rustsec:main Jun 3, 2023
@jonasbb

jonasbb commented Jun 3, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Ok, thanks. Then I will submit a second PR for trust-dns. Could you maybe check if and how aliases should be used here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants