[From nobody Wed Sep 9 14:07:12 2026 Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 17 Jul 2026 06:50:14 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (2024-03-25) on buxtehude.debian.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.9 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00, FOURLA, FROMDEVELOPER, NO_RELAYS,XMAILER_REPORTBUG autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 40; hammy, 150; neutral, 183; spammy, 0. spammytokens: hammytokens:0.000-+--H*F:U*carnil, 0.000-+--XDebbugsCc, 0.000-+--X-Debbugs-Cc, 0.000-+--H*Ad:N*Bug, 0.000-+--H*Ad:N*Tracking Return-path: <carnil@debian.org> Received: via submission by buxtehude.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from <carnil@debian.org>) id 1wkcOj-00GhDq-1F for submit@bugs.debian.org; Fri, 17 Jul 2026 06:50:14 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org> Subject: 389-ds-base: CVE-2026-11610 CVE-2026-14940 CVE-2026-14969 CVE-2026-15041 Message-ID: <178427101196.486135.4476638906266368658.reportbug@eldamar.lan> X-Mailer: reportbug 13.2.0+nmu1 Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 08:50:11 +0200 Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org Source: 389-ds-base Version: 3.1.2+vendor1-2 Severity: grave Tags: security upstream Justification: user security hole X-Debbugs-Cc: carnil@debian.org, Debian Security Team <team@security.debian.org> Hi, The following vulnerabilities were published for 389-ds-base. We will need some help from you to identify the proper upstream fixes for this set of CVEs. Thanks already. CVE-2026-11610[0]: | A heap buffer overflow flaw was found in the SASL I/O layer of 389 | Directory Server (389-ds-base). After a successful SASL bind with | integrity protection (SSF > 0), an authenticated attacker can send a | specially crafted oversized LDAP UNBIND packet that is copied into a | 512-byte heap receive buffer without a bounds check in | sasl_io_recv() in sasl_io.c. This allows up to approximately 2 | megabytes of attacker-controlled data to overflow the buffer, | causing a denial of service (server crash). In FreeIPA and Red Hat | Identity Management deployments, any domain user with a valid | Kerberos ticket, any enrolled host, or any service account can | trigger this vulnerability over the network after authenticating via | GSSAPI. The vulnerable code path has existed since approximately | 2013 (389-ds-base 1.3.2) and was not addressed by the CVE-2025-14905 | fix, which patched a separate heap overflow in schema.c only. CVE-2026-14940[1]: | A heap-buffer-overflow flaw was found in 389 Directory Server | (389-ds-base). When normalizing a Distinguished Name (DN) that | contains a legacy-quoted value encoding a multivalued nested | Relative Distinguished Name (RDN), the server can write past the end | of a heap allocation while sorting RDN attribute-value pairs. An | unauthenticated remote attacker can trigger this condition by | sending an LDAP operation whose DN reaches the DN normalization | routine, such as a search with a crafted base DN. This can corrupt | heap memory and may cause denial of service. CVE-2026-14969[2]: | A flaw was found in 389-ds-base where the LDBM backend attribute | encryption uses a hardcoded static initialization vector for AES-CBC | and 3DES-CBC operations, allowing an attacker with privileged | filesystem access to detect plaintext equality across encrypted | entries by comparing ciphertext blocks. CVE-2026-15041[3]: | A flaw was found in 389 Directory Server. The PBKDF2-SHA256 password | verification function uses standard memcmp() for comparing password | hashes instead of a constant-time comparison function. A remote | attacker could potentially use timing measurements of LDAP bind | attempts to infer partial hash information, though practical | exploitation is extremely difficult due to PBKDF2 computational | overhead. If you fix the vulnerabilities please also make sure to include the CVE (Common Vulnerabilities & Exposures) ids in your changelog entry. For further information see: [0] https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-11610 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-11610 [1] https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-14940 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-14940 [2] https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-14969 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-14969 [3] https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-15041 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-15041 Regards, Salvatore ]