Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 04 Sep 2020 15:03:09 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 249110] security/gnupg: 2.2.23 is incorrectly marked as vulnerable by pkg audit
Message-ID:  <bug-249110-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D249110

            Bug ID: 249110
           Summary: security/gnupg: 2.2.23 is incorrectly marked as
                    vulnerable by pkg audit
           Product: Ports & Packages
           Version: Latest
          Hardware: Any
                OS: Any
            Status: New
          Severity: Affects Only Me
          Priority: ---
         Component: Individual Port(s)
          Assignee: adamw@FreeBSD.org
          Reporter: jjuanino@gmail.com
             Flags: maintainer-feedback?(adamw@FreeBSD.org)
          Assignee: adamw@FreeBSD.org

Hi, I have updated security/gnupg to 2.2.23 version to address CVE-2013-457=
6,
but the port is still considered vulnerable by pkg audit:

# pkg info -x gnupg
gnupg-2.2.23

# pkg audit gnupg-2.2.23
gnupg-2.2.23 is vulnerable:
gnupg -- AEAD key import overflow
CVE: CVE-2020-25125
WWW:
https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/f9fa7adc-ee51-11ea-a240-002590acae31.html

1 problem(s) in 1 installed package(s) found.


I have inspected the registered item in vuxml database and it seems to be f=
ine:

  <vuln vid=3D"f9fa7adc-ee51-11ea-a240-002590acae31">
    <topic>gnupg -- AEAD key import overflow</topic>
    <affects>
      <package>
        <name>gnupg</name>
        <range><ge>2.2.21</ge></range>
        <range><lt>2.2.23</lt></range>
      </package>

As you can see, 2.2.23 is out of the range, and therefore 2.2.23 is not
vulnerable.

Am I doing something wrong or misunderstanding something?

Regards

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-249110-7788>