[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       oss-security
Subject:    Re: [oss-security] Re: [videolan] [oss-security] older issues in libbluray
From:       Tavis Ormandy <taviso () google ! com>
Date:       2015-02-24 21:09:17
Message-ID: CAJ_zFk+hy4ns=VZQPeBibnP_BieFXvaoj7wgr2sWEZWmh6jpEg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf <jb@videolan.org> wrote:
> On 24 Feb, Tavis Ormandy wrote :
>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf <jb@videolan.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 23 Feb, Kurt Seifried wrote :
>> > > Again my apologies for this mess. The good news is that all our current
>> > > embargoed flaws (none against VLC currently =) are being actively
>> > > handled (e.g. worked on in a current time frame) and moving forwards we
>> > > should hopefully be able to avoid issues like this.
>> >
>> > One libbluray issue was already fixed.
>> > The second one is not really fixable, since BD-J is actually executing
>> > java code from the outside.
>>
>> Forgive my unfamiliarity with BluRay, but based on what you just said,
>> it seems like the solution is what was described in the report: just
>> use a JSM?
>
> I don't see the JSM mentioned in the bugreport.
>

I didn't get the bug report, I was referring to the subject Florian
pasted, "missing Java Security Manager sandbox in the BD-J
implementation". If you run untrusted java, you would normally use a
JSM, if you don't use one that does sound like a bug to me.

Sigh, embargoes.

Tavis.
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]