CVE-ID

CVE-2000-0242

• Severity Rating • Fix Information • Vulnerable Software Versions • SCAP Mappings
Description
WindMail allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files or execute commands via shell metacharacters.
References
Note: References are provided for the convenience of the reader to help distinguish between vulnerabilities. The list is not intended to be complete.
Assigning CNA
N/A
Date Entry Created
20000412 Disclaimer: The entry creation date may reflect when the CVE-ID was allocated or reserved, and does not necessarily indicate when this vulnerability was discovered, shared with the affected vendor, publicly disclosed, or updated in CVE.
Phase (Legacy)
Proposed (20000412)
Votes (Legacy)
ACCEPT(2) Cole, Levy
NOOP(1) Baker
RECAST(1) Frech
REJECT(2) Christey, Magdych
Comments (Legacy)
 Frech> Violation of fundamentum divisionis (that is, it's more than one issue) and
   a potential nitpick:
   - windmail-fileread: allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files
   - windmail-pipe-command: execute commands via shell metacharacters
   - The conjunction 'or' should be 'and', if you decide to stick with one CAN.
 Christey> As Andre basically said without naming content decisions,
   CD:SF-LOC says this should be split.
   
   HOWEVER - the author of the product says that WindMail isn't
   supposed to be a CGI script, and says that the pipe 
   character problem is not related to Geocel.  So should CVE
   record when someone runs a program that wasn't intended to
   be a CGI?  There may be a level of abstraction issue here.
   Note that Perl and shell interpreters in CGI-BIN are 
   already mentioned in CVE-1999-0509.  If we want to include
   "using a program that wasn't designed to be a CGI" as a
   problem, we should have a separate candidate.
   
   See the author's comments at:
   http://www.securityfocus.com/templates/archive.pike?list=1&msg=3.0.5.32.20000331114325.013af680@mailhost.geocel.com
   
   which also claims that the original announcer hasn't provided
   any more details after the author was unable to reproduce the
   problem.
 CHANGE> [Magdych changed vote from REVIEWING to REJECT]
 Magdych> After reviewing the author's comments, I'm inclined to think that this is more of a misconfiguration than a vulnerability.

Proposed (Legacy)
20000412
This is an entry on the CVE list, which standardizes names for security problems.