• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The GHOST vulnerability to the Linux glibc library. Patch your stuff

OutHouse

Lifer
The GHOST vulnerability is a serious weakness in the Linux glibc library. It allows attackers to remotely take complete control of the victim system without having any prior knowledge of system credentials. CVE-2015-0235 has been assigned to this issue.

Qualys security researchers discovered this bug and worked closely with Linux distribution vendors. And as a result of that we are releasing this advisory today as a co-ordinated effort, and patches for all distribution are available January 27, 2015.

What is glibc?
The GNU C Library or glibc is an implementation of the standard C library and a core part of the Linux operating system. Without this library a Linux system will not function.

What is the vulnerability?
During a code audit Qualys researchers discovered a buffer overflow in the __nss_hostname_digits_dots() function of glibc. This bug can be triggered both locally and remotely via all the gethostbyname*() functions. Applications have access to the DNS resolver primarily through the gethostbyname*() set of functions. These functions convert a hostname into an IP address.

What versions and operating systems are affected?
The first vulnerable version of the GNU C Library affected by this is glibc-2.2, released on November 10, 2000. We identified a number of factors that mitigate the impact of this bug. In particular, we discovered that it was fixed on May 21, 2013 (between the releases of glibc-2.17 and glibc-2.18). Unfortunately, it was not recognized as a security threat; as a result, most stable and long-term-support distributions were left exposed including Debian 7 (wheezy), Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 & 7, CentOS 6 & 7, Ubuntu 12.04, for example.

https://community.qualys.com/blogs/laws-of-vulnerabilities/2015/01/27/the-ghost-vulnerability
 
Last edited:
I've been dealing with this since yesterday. Sometimes I hate tech. My understanding is this has been around since 2000 and no one thought it was an issue. Now suddenly everyone is in panic mode. 😛
 
I've been dealing with this since yesterday. Sometimes I hate tech. My understanding is this has been around since 2000 and no one thought it was an issue. Now suddenly everyone is in panic mode. 😛
I've been patched since 2013. 😀
 
I've been dealing with this since yesterday. Sometimes I hate tech. My understanding is this has been around since 2000 and no one thought it was an issue. Now suddenly everyone is in panic mode. 😛

They didn't recognize the danger, and there's a proof of concept ready for immanent release, if it hasn't been released already.
 
Like anyone was ever going to bother exploiting this lol. No Windows is where the butter is.
 
Is there a way to test if you are patched? I want to run that test on my systems before I patch then run it after, just to get confirmation.

Is this the same one that affects gethostbyname() and such? If not... that's another nasty bug that just got found.

It's odd how some of these things take so long to find, but it makes you wonder how many similar bugs exist in closed sourced code.
 
If only...banks run on it. We have around 300k servers, half of which are going to need patched. Fun times.

At least the ATMs are running on Windows NT and XP, so those should be safe. :awe:

Honestly I'm surprised you don't hear of ATMs being hacked more often. Like someone who makes a custom debit card that loads code into the machine and makes it execute stuff or something.
 
Is there a way to test if you are patched? I want to run that test on my systems before I patch then run it after, just to get confirmation.

Is this the same one that affects gethostbyname() and such? If not... that's another nasty bug that just got found.

It's odd how some of these things take so long to find, but it makes you wonder how many similar bugs exist in closed sourced code.

Check your glibc version number. <2.2 and >2.17 are fine
 
99% of chance this would never been discovered by hackers, because they don't have all the time in the world to read source code of all open source projects... although researchers make systems more secure, this comes at a great cost.
 
99% of chance this would never been discovered by hackers, because they don't have all the time in the world to read source code of all open source projects... although researchers make systems more secure, this comes at a great cost.

I'd imagine hackers are the ones that look at the source code more so they can find exploits. The white hats report the bugs, the black hats use them.
 
I'd imagine hackers are the ones that look at the source code more so they can find exploits. The white hats report the bugs, the black hats use them.
well bug was undiscovered for > 10 yrs, so they are not doing the best job 🙂
I've seen quite a few of these high impact vulnerabilities lately that were not discovered by black hat hackers.
 
What I'm not clear on is if routers are affected and if there is really any way to patch old ones unless you are using DDWRT type firmware....(don't know a whole lot about the inner workings of routers/switches)
 
What I'm not clear on is if routers are affected and if there is really any way to patch old ones unless you are using DDWRT type firmware....(don't know a whole lot about the inner workings of routers/switches)
Judging by the install size (35MB), I don't think many routers would use glibc.
 
What I'm not clear on is if routers are affected and if there is really any way to patch old ones unless you are using DDWRT type firmware....(don't know a whole lot about the inner workings of routers/switches)


That's an interesting question because I'm using DD=WRT.
 
Back
Top