[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[SECURITY] [DLA 2275-1] ruby-rack security update



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Debian LTS Advisory DLA-2275-1              debian-lts@lists.debian.org
https://www.debian.org/lts/security/                      Utkarsh Gupta
July 10, 2020                               https://wiki.debian.org/LTS
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Package        : ruby-rack
Version        : 1.6.4-4+deb9u2
CVE ID         : CVE-2020-8161 CVE-2020-8184
Debian Bug     : 963477

The following CVEs were reported against src:ruby-rack.

CVE-2020-8161

    A directory traversal vulnerability exists in rack < 2.2.0 that
    allows an attacker perform directory traversal vulnerability in
    the Rack::Directory app that is bundled with Rack which could
    result in information disclosure.

CVE-2020-8184

    A reliance on cookies without validation/integrity check security
    vulnerability exists in rack < 2.2.3, rack < 2.1.4 that makes it
    is possible for an attacker to forge a secure or host-only cookie
    prefix.

For Debian 9 stretch, these problems have been fixed in version
1.6.4-4+deb9u2.

We recommend that you upgrade your ruby-rack packages.

For the detailed security status of ruby-rack please refer to
its security tracker page at:
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/ruby-rack

Further information about Debian LTS security advisories, how to apply
these updates to your system and frequently asked questions can be
found at: https://wiki.debian.org/LTS

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=KgBu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: