Re: openssl / CVE-2016-2177.patch

2016-06-21 Thread Brian May
Brian May  writes:

> It might be worth somebody else testing it, just in case this is
> something specific to my build.
>
> Will continue investigating.

Looks like the test certificates may have expired.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1581084

Most likely reason anyway.
-- 
Brian May 



Re: Xen i386 support on Debian wheezy-LTS

2016-06-21 Thread Bastian Blank
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 05:38:33PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> According to Bastian Blank the the fix for XSA 173 breaks i386
> support. The HVM domains die immediately due to a triple fault.  His
> working theory is that invalid bits slip into the initial page table of
> the domain. He is recommending that we drop support for i386 in order
> that we can continue patching Xen in wheezy with the latest security
> updates.

I forgot the provide further findings.

Each HVM domain immediately dies with a triple fault:

| (XEN) hvm.c:1134:d1 Triple fault on VCPU0 - invoking HVM system reset.
| (XEN) *** Dumping Dom1 vcpu#0 state: ***
| (XEN) [ Xen-4.1.6.1  x86_32p  debug=n  Not tainted ]
| (XEN) CPU:1
| (XEN) EIP::[<00101520>]
| (XEN) EFLAGS: 0002   CONTEXT: hvm guest
| (XEN) eax:    ebx:    ecx:    edx: 
| (XEN) esi:    edi:    ebp:    esp: 
| (XEN) cr0: 0011   cr4:    cr3:    cr2: 00101520
| (XEN) ds:    es:    fs:    gs:    ss:    cs: 

CR0 shows the system is in a pretty early state: it is already in
protected mode but nothing else.  It dies during access of the the page
fault handler specified in CR2.

A domain in this state can't be dumped.

Regards,
Bastian

-- 
Lots of people drink from the wrong bottle sometimes.
-- Edith Keeler, "The City on the Edge of Forever",
   stardate unknown



Re: openssl / CVE-2016-2177.patch

2016-06-21 Thread Brian May
Brian May  writes:

> Looks like the test certificates may have expired.
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1581084

Yes, builds fine now after applying the patch from the above link.
-- 
Brian May 



Re: Security update of Gosa

2016-06-21 Thread Mike Gabriel

Hi Markus,

On  Di 21 Jun 2016 01:15:17 CEST, Markus Koschany wrote:


Hello Michael,

you are still listed in dla-needed.txt as the owner of Gosa. Apparently
you already prepared a debdiff and sent it to the security team but it
was never released. Would it be possible to share it with us? Or can you
confirm that the following patches from Jessie will resolve this issue?

https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/g/gosa/changelog-2.7.4%2Breloaded2-1%2Bdeb8u2

CVE-2015-8771:

0006_code-injection-in-samba-hash-generation.patch,
0007_update-sambaHashHook-description.patch. Fix potential
  code injection issue in Samba hash generation. (CVE-2015-8771)



CVE-2014-9760:

https://sources.debian.net/src/gosa/2.7.4%2Breloaded2-12/debian/patches/0003_xss-vulnerability-on-login-screen.patch/

Regards

Markus


I'll get back to you tomorrow on this. Basically, I can do the upload my self.

Greets,
Mike
--

mike gabriel aka sunweaver (Debian Developer)
mobile: +49 (1520) 1976 148
landline: +49 (4354) 8390 139

GnuPG Fingerprint: 9BFB AEE8 6C0A A5FF BF22  0782 9AF4 6B30 2577 1B31
mail: sunwea...@debian.org, http://sunweavers.net



pgpidsAkHdQ2g.pgp
Description: Digitale PGP-Signatur


Re: xen_4.1.6.1-1+deb7u2.dsc

2016-06-21 Thread Stephan Helas
Hello,

i just want to inform you, that i had a very serios regession after
upgrading to 4.1.6. Live-Migration of XEN-HVM guests ends in a dom0
crash or CPU Stuck Error. Dom0 and Domu are Wheezy amd64.


-- 
Best Regards
Stephan Helas



Re: xen_4.1.6.1-1+deb7u2.dsc

2016-06-21 Thread Brian May
Stephan Helas  writes:

> i just want to inform you, that i had a very serios regession after
> upgrading to 4.1.6. Live-Migration of XEN-HVM guests ends in a dom0
> crash or CPU Stuck Error. Dom0 and Domu are Wheezy amd64.

Just to be clear; you replied to the thread on version
xen_4.1.6.1-1+deb7u2.dsc; however I never uploaded that version. It has
known problems on i386.

Maybe you meant to say you have version 4.1.6.1-1+deb7u1 ?
-- 
Brian May 



Re: xen_4.1.6.1-1+deb7u2.dsc

2016-06-21 Thread Stephan Helas
Hi,
On 06/21/2016 01:22 PM, Brian May wrote:
> Stephan Helas  writes:
> 
>> i just want to inform you, that i had a very serios regession after
>> upgrading to 4.1.6. Live-Migration of XEN-HVM guests ends in a dom0
>> crash or CPU Stuck Error. Dom0 and Domu are Wheezy amd64.
> 
> Just to be clear; you replied to the thread on version
> xen_4.1.6.1-1+deb7u2.dsc; however I never uploaded that version. It has
> known problems on i386.
> 
> Maybe you meant to say you have version 4.1.6.1-1+deb7u1 ?
> 

yes. i've checked. the info is about 4.1.6.1-1+deb7u1. i found the same
error here:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xen/+bug/1515145



-- 
Viele Grüße
Stephan Helas



Re: xen_4.1.6.1-1+deb7u2.dsc

2016-06-21 Thread Brian May
Hello Bastian Blank,

It appears that we need an extra patch to get the fix for xsa97 working
properly. See the linked Ubuntu bug report.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xen/+bug/1515145

Just wondering if you included this in version 4.1.6.1-1+deb7u2 by any
chance?

Thanks


Stephan Helas  writes:

>>> i just want to inform you, that i had a very serios regession after
>>> upgrading to 4.1.6. Live-Migration of XEN-HVM guests ends in a dom0
>>> crash or CPU Stuck Error. Dom0 and Domu are Wheezy amd64.
>> 
>> Just to be clear; you replied to the thread on version
>> xen_4.1.6.1-1+deb7u2.dsc; however I never uploaded that version. It has
>> known problems on i386.
>> 
>> Maybe you meant to say you have version 4.1.6.1-1+deb7u1 ?
>> 
>
> yes. i've checked. the info is about 4.1.6.1-1+deb7u1. i found the same
> error here:
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xen/+bug/1515145

-- 
Brian May 



Re: Xen i386 support on Debian wheezy-LTS

2016-06-21 Thread Simon Iremonger (debian)
On 2016-06-20 07:38, Brian May wrote:
> According to Bastian Blank the the fix for XSA 173 breaks i386
> support. The HVM domains die immediately due to a triple fault.
> His working theory is that invalid bits slip into the initial
> page table of the domain. He is recommending that we drop support
> for i386 in order that we can continue patching Xen in wheezy
> with the latest security
>> - make 32-bit hvm unsupported or
>> - drop 32-bit hypervisor altogether.

I got the impression that:-
* i386 hypervisor support is a key use of Xen-4.1.
* PV mode used more in older installs.

I definitely think there is a case for supporting
i386 hypervisor for PV guests, even if HVM may become
unsupportable (e.g. also due to QEMU patching, though
apparently QEMU could be swapped for newer more supportable
version without too much trouble).

--Simon





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature