-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
OpenSSL Releases 14th August 2018 #22187
Comments
@rvagg can this go out in a regular LTS release? We have a backlog of 6.x changes. |
@MylesBorins it looks like we didn't float the other patches on anything but master/v10.x so it probably should be a discrete security release, but there's no reason we couldn't bump them up against eachother. Security release followed quickly by a proper 6.x and 8.x (that's pending isn't it?). I could take LTS releases for this if we can get someone else to do the 1.0.2 patching. Then I'd say proceed with 6.x and 8.x as planned/normal. I've been hearing we have stuff queued but not pushed out, are we following a schedule anymore or are we too stretched on people-time? Do I need to step up and do a standard LTS release or two? |
We have an 8.x proposal put together rn, targeting a Sept 4 release
6.x has a handful of patches on staging, but as we are in maintenance we
haven't planned anything releases
…On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 9:08 PM Rod Vagg ***@***.***> wrote:
@MylesBorins <https://github.com/MylesBorins> it looks like we didn't
float the other patches on anything but master/v10.x so it probably should
be a discrete security release, but there's no reason we couldn't bump them
up against eachother. Security release followed quickly by a proper 6.x and
8.x (that's pending isn't it?).
I could take LTS releases for this if we can get someone else to do the
1.0.2 patching. Then I'd say proceed with 6.x and 8.x as planned/normal.
I've been hearing we have stuff queued but not pushed out, are we following
a schedule anymore or are we too stretched on people-time? Do I need to
step up and do a standard LTS release or two?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#22187 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecV_l3F14qYqzRAsjEZK-NUrTqI7WRks5uO4uTgaJpZM4VzSiF>
.
|
@MylesBorins would you like me to take one of these? Maybe I could queue up a 6.x maintenance with what's on staging in the next couple of weeks, or even Sept 4. |
@nodejs/security-wg |
@nodejs/crypto I need some help confirming impact, or lack thereof for CVE-2018-0737 on Node. It's a cache-timing attack that only impacts RSA keygen, nothing else. The fix simply switches to constant-time operations in |
oh gee ... pointing me to my own issue, my memory really is getting bad. Thanks @tniessen! |
npm@6.4.0 which resolved its own |
@brodybits The pull request to add it was opened 40 minutes ago. I think it's going to have to wait for the next release. |
We also have a policy of waiting two weeks before landing a new version of npm: https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/doc/guides/maintaining-npm.md
|
Releases have been made: https://nodejs.org/en/blog/vulnerability/august-2018-security-releases/ |
@nodejs/release
https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2018-August/000129.html
So we have CVE-2018-0732 in already in 10.x/master, we floated it @ 772d390.
We also floated 831821b, the ECDSA blinding attack that didn't get a CVE AFAIK. It's also not listed in this advisory, perhaps they're considering it below their threshold even for "Low".
I wasn't aware of CVE-2018-0737, that's:
I think 2018 is going to be defined by various creative and difficult side-channel attacks. We're going to want to get this one out but I wouldn't call it "critical", just something we might expect pressure on if we don't get it out within a few days. We should probably released patched versions of LTS and then bundle this into the next regular 10.x release.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: