[Bug 2048092] Re: [low-priority SRU] Fix CVE-2022-0563 in source

[dann frazier]

@ahasenack - thanks for asking these questions.

I do know of a user rebuilding jammy's util-linux. The build recipe I've
seen installs these binaries. I don't know the risk that they might
become setuid. This CVE I noticed as being fixed in a later version of
util-linux, but not in jammy. I then looked it up in our CVE tracker and
saw why we had chosen not to patch it.

To verify that the code inside is not used, I used inotifywait during
the build to watch for processes opening these .c files. Each file is
opened exactly twice - both times during the dh-autoreconf phase, where
it collects a checksum before and after using md5sum. Neither file is
opened again.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Foundations Bugs, which is subscribed to util-linux in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2048092

Title:
  [low-priority SRU] Fix CVE-2022-0563 in source

Status in util-linux package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in util-linux source package in Jammy:
  In Progress
Status in util-linux source package in Lunar:
  Fix Released
Status in util-linux source package in Mantic:
  Fix Released
Status in util-linux source package in Noble:
  Fix Released

Bug description:
  [Impact]
  We did not fix this CVE in Ubuntu because we do not build the impacted binaries (we use --disable-chfn-chsh). However, some users are known to build their own binaries from this Ubuntu source and therefore could be impacted.

  [Test Plan]
  Since there is no impact to Ubuntu binaries, there is no functional change to verify. Regression testing using the existing build-time tests and autopkgtests should suffice.

  We should also verify that util-linux source builds fine w/ chfn and
  chsh enabled after applying this patch - otherwise it is really
  helping no one.

  [Where problems could occur]
  The upstream patch is clearly restricted to the chfn chsh binaries, which are not compiled by Ubuntu, so I don't see a risk there. I do see a risk that this is used as a precedent to fix other no-impact-to-Ubuntu security issues in other source - say, just to silence 3rd party security scanners. I do not intend to set such a precedent here, and suggest we consider them only on a case-by-case basis.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/util-linux/+bug/2048092/+subscriptions