New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
We shouldn't trust unprotected header fields when replying #4237
Labels
bug:upstream
Also exists in upstream Mutt
topic:security
Security issue
type:bug
Bug
type:discuss
Your views/opinions are requested
Comments
alejandro-colomar
added
type:discuss
Your views/opinions are requested
bug:upstream
Also exists in upstream Mutt
topic:security
Security issue
type:bug
Bug
labels
Apr 8, 2024
alejandro-colomar
added a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
Apr 11, 2024
They are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Cc: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
As mentioned in #4221 (comment), we could add some warnings if the headers have been tampered (they don't match the protected ones). I propose:
(Please review syntax; not native English here. I'm especially bad with prepositions.) |
flatcap
pushed a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
Apr 12, 2024
They are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Cc: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
alejandro-colomar
added a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
Apr 12, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Cc: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
flatcap
pushed a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
Apr 16, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Cc: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
alejandro-colomar
added a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
Apr 17, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Cc: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
alejandro-colomar
added a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
Apr 17, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Cc: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
alejandro-colomar
added a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
Apr 22, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Reviewed-by: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
alejandro-colomar
added a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
Apr 22, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Reviewed-by: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Cc: Pietro Cerutti <gahr@gahr.ch> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
flatcap
pushed a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
Apr 29, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Reviewed-by: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Cc: Pietro Cerutti <gahr@gahr.ch> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
alejandro-colomar
added a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
May 2, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Reviewed-by: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Cc: Pietro Cerutti <gahr@gahr.ch> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
flatcap
pushed a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
May 8, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Reviewed-by: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Cc: Pietro Cerutti <gahr@gahr.ch> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
flatcap
pushed a commit
to alejandro-colomar/neomutt
that referenced
this issue
May 8, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <neomutt#4223> Link: <neomutt#4226> Link: <neomutt#4227> Link: <neomutt#4236> Link: <neomutt#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Reviewed-by: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Cc: Pietro Cerutti <gahr@gahr.ch> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
flatcap
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 8, 2024
Protected header fields are part of the crypto message, which means the sender considers them part of the important data, and should not be carelessly weeded. If the user want to do it, allow them via this variable, but default to not weeding them. Link: <#4223> Link: <#4226> Link: <#4227> Link: <#4236> Link: <#4237> Cc: Richard Russon <rich@flatcap.org> Reviewed-by: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> Cc: Pietro Cerutti <gahr@gahr.ch> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
bug:upstream
Also exists in upstream Mutt
topic:security
Security issue
type:bug
Bug
type:discuss
Your views/opinions are requested
This is not a new bug report, but a branch of #4223.
I'd like to discuss how to behave when replying to messages with security, i.e., messages that are signed and/or encrypted.
I would discard any headers that are not protected, and only reply to protected From and similar fields.
If a sender doesn't sign nor encrypt their messages, of course, neomutt(1) will continue to reply as always, because there's nothing we can do.
But when a sender signs or encrypts their messages, when replying with neomutt(1), we will stop accepting unprotected address lists. So, for a message sent with an old version of neomutt(1), or with some other vulnerable MUA, like thunderbird(1), it will have empty
To
andCc
, and the user will have to manually specify it. This will be inconvenient. But it also means we will not blindly use insecure recipients, avoiding accidental secret-information leaks and similar issues. Hopefully, all MUAs would take these vulnerabilities seriously, and fix their programs soon.Does that sound reasonable?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: