[gentoo-user] Should www-plugins/adobe-flash have "stable" versions?
This is cut/pasted from today's @RISK email from sans.org: Title: Adobe Releases Emergency to Patch Zero Day Under Active Exploitation in the Wild Description: Adobe released an out-of-band patch to address CVE-2015-3113, a Flash Player zero-day vulnerability that is actively being used by an APT group. The exploit has been ongoing since early this month via phishing emails and affects Windows, Mac, and Linux users. CVE-2015-3113 is a vulnerability in the way Flash parses Flash Video Files (FLV). The exploit bypasses memory-based protection such as ASLR and uses return-oriented programming (ROP) to bypass data execution prevention (DEP). Reference: https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/flash-player/apsb15-14.html I see that the gentoo devs have already added the latest version to my ~amd64 machine (thanks, team) but what about all the people who are running stable gentoo?
Re: [gentoo-user] Should www-plugins/adobe-flash have "stable" versions?
Hi, On Thu, 25 Jun 2015 16:02:00 -0700 walt wrote: > Title: Adobe Releases Emergency to Patch Zero Day Under Active > Exploitation in the Wild > Description: Adobe released an out-of-band patch to address > CVE-2015-3113, a Flash Player zero-day vulnerability that is actively > being used by an APT group. The exploit has been ongoing since early > this month via phishing emails and affects Windows, Mac, and Linux > users. CVE-2015-3113 is a vulnerability in the way Flash parses Flash > Video Files (FLV). The exploit bypasses memory-based protection such > as ASLR and uses return-oriented programming (ROP) to bypass data > execution prevention (DEP). > Reference: > https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/flash-player/apsb15-14.html > > I see that the gentoo devs have already added the latest version to my > ~amd64 machine (thanks, team) but what about all the people who are > running stable gentoo? Taking how intensive vulnerability rate for adobe-flash is and considering its closed nature (e.g. no ability to fix issues in time yourself) I'd recommend to avoid its use at all. For cases where it can't be replaced (e.g. with gnash or html5-compatible browser) use isolated container or vm. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko pgpN4D6MH65Qf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Should www-plugins/adobe-flash have "stable" versions?
On 26/06/2015 08:12, Andrew Savchenko wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 25 Jun 2015 16:02:00 -0700 walt wrote: >> Title: Adobe Releases Emergency to Patch Zero Day Under Active >> Exploitation in the Wild >> Description: Adobe released an out-of-band patch to address >> CVE-2015-3113, a Flash Player zero-day vulnerability that is actively >> being used by an APT group. The exploit has been ongoing since early >> this month via phishing emails and affects Windows, Mac, and Linux >> users. CVE-2015-3113 is a vulnerability in the way Flash parses Flash >> Video Files (FLV). The exploit bypasses memory-based protection such >> as ASLR and uses return-oriented programming (ROP) to bypass data >> execution prevention (DEP). >> Reference: >> https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/flash-player/apsb15-14.html >> >> I see that the gentoo devs have already added the latest version to my >> ~amd64 machine (thanks, team) but what about all the people who are >> running stable gentoo? > > Taking how intensive vulnerability rate for adobe-flash is and > considering its closed nature (e.g. no ability to fix issues in > time yourself) I'd recommend to avoid its use at all. For cases > where it can't be replaced (e.g. with gnash or html5-compatible > browser) use isolated container or vm. I was going to answer much the same, you beat me to it :-) Flash's track record puts packagers in a very awkward position - the manpower to keep up with patches in a reasonable timeframe is just too much. So the devs do the best they can but ultimately the user must make a hard decision (convenience vs security) and accept full consequences of their decision. I personally think that stable Flash is a joke and it's one of those packages that a user must keyword. Or invest the time/effort in your other suggestion of an isolated browser. Tough choice, but that's how it goes with such software -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
