https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2050290
Bug ID: 2050290
Summary: lua: typo on man page
Product: Fedora
Version: 35
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
Component: lua
Severity: low
Assignee: spotrh(a)gmail.com
Reporter: loganjerry(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: 4le(a)live.com, drjohnson1(a)gmail.com,
lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
mhroncok(a)redhat.com, michel(a)michel-slm.name,
rob.myers(a)gtri.gatech.edu, spotrh(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
The man page says (in part):
LUA_PATH, LUA_PATH_5_4
Initial value of package.cpath, the path used by require to search for
Lua loaders.
That should be package.path, not package.cpath. This caused me a minute or so
of confusion. :-)
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
lua-5.4.3-4.fc35.x86_64
How reproducible:
N/A
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Actual results:
Expected results:
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2050290
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2177239
Bug ID: 2177239
Summary: Lua scripts use an unsafe package path
Product: Fedora
Version: 37
Status: NEW
Component: lua
Assignee: spotrh(a)gmail.com
Reporter: arstoffel(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: 4le(a)live.com, drjohnson1(a)gmail.com,
lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
mhroncok(a)redhat.com, michel(a)michel-slm.name,
spotrh(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
By default, Lua allows loading code from the current directory, and Fedora
doesn't change this in packaged scripts installed in the system path. This has
security implications.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install any package that provides a #!/usr/bin/lua script, such as (but not
limited) to luarocks
2. In the terminal: echo 'os.execute("echo rm -rf /")' > lfs.lua; luarocks
--version
Actual results:
$ luarocks --version
rm -rf /
/usr/bin/lua: /usr/share/lua/5.4/luarocks/fs/lua.lua:299: attempt to index a
boolean value (upvalue 'lfs')
stack traceback:
/usr/share/lua/5.4/luarocks/fs/lua.lua:299: in function
'luarocks.fs.lua.current_dir'
(...tail calls...)
/usr/share/lua/5.4/luarocks/fs/unix.lua:50: in function
'luarocks.fs.unix.absolute_name'
(...tail calls...)
/usr/share/lua/5.4/luarocks/fs/linux.lua:8: in function
'luarocks.fs.linux.is_dir'
(...tail calls...)
/usr/share/lua/5.4/luarocks/fs/lua.lua:193: in function
'luarocks.fs.lua.dir'
(...tail calls...)
/usr/share/lua/5.4/luarocks/fs/lua.lua:177: in function
'luarocks.fs.lua.list_dir'
(...tail calls...)
/usr/share/lua/5.4/luarocks/fs/lua.lua:229: in function
'luarocks.fs.lua.modules'
(...tail calls...)
/usr/share/lua/5.4/luarocks/cmd.lua:511: in function
'luarocks.cmd.run_command'
/home/augusto/Projects/digestif/.luarocks/lib/luarocks/rocks-5.4/luarocks/3.9.2-1/bin/luarocks:35:
in main chunk
[C]: in ?
Expected results:
$ luarocks --version
/usr/bin/luarocks 3.9.1
LuaRocks main command-line interface
Additional info:
I'm using the following fix on a Lua program I maintain:
#!/usr/bin/env lua
-- Remove relative directories from package path
package.path = package.path:gsub("%f[^\0;]%.[^;]*", ""):gsub(";+",
";"):gsub("^;", ""):gsub(";$", "")
package.cpath = package.cpath:gsub("%f[^\0;]%.[^;]*", ""):gsub(";+",
";"):gsub("^;", ""):gsub(";$", "")
Fedora can probably do better and use hardcoded pacakge.path and cpath values,
since these are known in advance.
Scripts with the #!/usr/bin/texlua shebang also might be affected by this
issue. Since texlua provides an alternative method to find packages based on
kpathsea, something like this should be used as well:
os.setenv("TEXMFDOTDIR", "/dev/null")
However, this last modification will break programs that expect to find TeX
files in the current directory. I don't know of a more fine grained way that
would allow that but still exclude random Lua libraries from being found.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2177239
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2152006
Bug ID: 2152006
Summary: luarocks-3.9.2 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: luarocks
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Assignee: michel(a)michel-slm.name
Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: epel-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
ktdreyer(a)ktdreyer.com,
lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
michel(a)michel-slm.name
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Releases retrieved: 3.9.2
Upstream release that is considered latest: 3.9.2
Current version/release in rawhide: 3.9.1-1.fc38
URL: https://luarocks.org/
Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/
More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_M…
Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.
Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/1856/
To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/luarocks
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2152006
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2167829
Bug ID: 2167829
Summary: [RFE: EPEL9] EPEL9 branch for luarocks
Product: Fedora EPEL
Version: epel9
Status: NEW
Component: luarocks
Assignee: michel(a)michel-slm.name
Reporter: riehecky(a)fnal.gov
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: epel-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
ktdreyer(a)ktdreyer.com,
lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
michel(a)michel-slm.name
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
Can luarocks be branched for EPEL9?
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
How reproducible:
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Actual results:
Expected results:
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2167829
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143391
Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|Review Request: lua-utf8 - |Review Request: lua-luautf8
|A UTF-8 support module for |- A UTF-8 support module
|Lua |for Lua
--- Comment #8 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> ---
Could you have a look at the review? The name should be lua-luautf8.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143391
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2047672
Bug ID: 2047672
Summary: CVE-2021-43519 lua: stack overflow in lua_resume of
ldo.c allows a DoS via a crafted script file
Product: Security Response
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: vulnerability
Keywords: Security
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com
Reporter: mrehak(a)redhat.com
CC: 4le(a)live.com, bdettelb(a)redhat.com,
caswilli(a)redhat.com, csutherl(a)redhat.com,
drjohnson1(a)gmail.com, fjansen(a)redhat.com,
gzaronik(a)redhat.com, jburrell(a)redhat.com,
jclere(a)redhat.com, jwon(a)redhat.com,
kaycoth(a)redhat.com, krathod(a)redhat.com,
lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
mhroncok(a)redhat.com, michel(a)michel-slm.name,
mturk(a)redhat.com, packaging-team-maint(a)redhat.com,
pjindal(a)redhat.com, rob.myers(a)gtri.gatech.edu,
spotrh(a)gmail.com, szappis(a)redhat.com,
tkasparek(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Other
Stack overflow in lua_resume of ldo.c in Lua Interpreter allows attackers to
perform a Denial of Service via a crafted script file.
Reference:
http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2021-11/msg00015.htmlhttp://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2021-10/msg00123.html
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2047672