Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Week of Oracle Database Bugs

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the your-turn dept.

os2man writes "After the Month of Browser Bugs and the Month of Kernel Bugs, December will have a Week of Oracle Database Bugs. This project will release, every day for a week, a new 0-day bug specific to Oracle in order to show the current status of its [in]security. They are currently asking for new bugs, in order to extend the publication of new exploits a few more days."

11 of 56 comments (clear)

  1. Great by Spritzer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe they should look at security issues with Oracle's Discoverer client as well. It's pretty sad when having "@" in your password will compromise every character that follows within your password. For example, if ODB password were Sl@shd0t! and the database to connect to were BOB, at the next login the Connect field would be filled with shd0t!@BOB. Not a huge issue, but certainly a risk if multiple people with varying permissions/responsibilities in Oracle have access to a machine with Discoverer.

  2. um yeah by stoolpigeon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    without even commenting on the quality of oracle's rdbms, this statement:
    Why not the Month of Oracle Database Bugs?
    We could do the Year of Oracle Database Bugs but we think a week is enough to show how flawed Oracle software is, also we don't want to give away all our 0days:), anyways if you want to contribute send your Oracle 0days so this can be extended for another week or more.
     
    doesn't even make sense. They have enough to do a whole year but ask for people to send in more to extend it to a second week? Because they don't want to compromise their entire zero day horde? Sorry but I just can't take these people too seriously.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    1. Re:um yeah by ajs · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It does make sense, but it's just not very smart.

      This is a group of (or singular) kiddies who want to make Oracle look bad. That's fine, and Oracle is a big company that I'm sure can take care of itself (C&D paperwork is probably burning out toner cartriges by the gross at Oracle HQ as we speak). My concern is that folks that are good at security testing, but too young to know how to direct their efforts constructively are going to destroy their fledgling careers before they get started. Many such bright kids these days assume that they'll make a name for themselves, and then the consulting bucks will roll in. Problem is that the wrong kind of press can lead to SOME work, but far less than you would have gotten by building a reputation in the industry through the quality of your work and references.

      As with security, in the job/consulting world social engineering is often a better approach than trying to pick the lock on the front-door.

    2. Re:um yeah by djbckr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I was going to mod this up, but I thought I'd post instead. Oracle database work is my livelyhood. Oracle makes no qualms about the number of bugs they have. Many of them are posted for all to see on their MetaLink support site. Many of them are not public for security reasons - and well they should be.

      I've found several Oracle bugs in my dealings with the software. I create a reproduceable test-case and send it to them. They always respond with 1) this is a known bug, and it's bug #nnn; or 2) bug reproduced in lab on version n.n.n - filed as bug #nnn

      If I found a bug related to security, I am *certain* they would do the same, and not publish it. It would be foolish to do so. Why oh why do people like this need to publish security related bugs so everyone can get comprimised? It's simply irresponsible.

      Oracle software is a *huge* moving target, and to fix a bug in something used by so many is a long, involved process. Break something critical in a patch and watch all hell break loose. Let the bug fixers do their jobs. It takes time, and exposing flaws like this does nobody any good.

    3. Re:um yeah by Psychotext · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think realistically a lot of this can be traced back to the "Unbreakable" marketing campaign. They set themselves up for a major fall. That said, Oracle takes far too long to patch vulnerabilities and worrying about "breaking something critical" is not a good excuse.

      --
      People that believe in their opinions don't post AC.
  3. 0-day by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 4, Funny

    That word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    --
    http://outcampaign.org/
  4. Oracle is unbreakable by duffbeer703 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Mess with Oracle, and this guy will mess with you.

    --
    Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
  5. Next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I presume that will be followed by 2007, "The Year of Windows Vista Bugs"?

    1. Re:Next by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 3, Funny

      I thought this was already "The Decade of Microsoft Windows Bugs"?

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
  6. I feel like we are caught in a .... timeloop by msimm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They say A) they have enough bugs (erherm, not exploits) to last a year B) they also say (I won't even speculate on the quality of the comment) "we don't want to give away all our 0days".

    So whatever. They had a weeks worth of exploits and they'd like some other people to pony up so they can make it two while holding on to some super-secret exploits. 7337!

    Anyway, slamming on Oracle seems a little silly. Its software, there will be problems.

    --
    Quack, quack.
  7. Discovered in our DB class by Tawnos · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Not necessarily a security bug, but it can be annoying. This comes from the project description, as a warning when trying to do natural joins for the project.
    This query:

            select ordid, lineno, orderdate
                      , descrip "Description"
                      , total
            from ord natural join item natural join product

    is evaluated incorrectly in Oracle 10g (rel. 10.2.0.1).

    Compare its output with the correct results generated by this query:

              select ordid, lineno, orderdate
                        , descrip "Description"
                        , total
              from item natural join product natural join ord

    or this:

            select ordid, lineno, orderdate
                      , descrip "Description"
                      , total
            from ord natural join (item natural join product)

    or this:

            select ordid, lineno, orderdate
                      , prodid
                      , descrip "Description"
                      , total
            from ord natural join item natural join product

    This solution:

            select ordid, lineno, orderdate
                      , descrip "Description"
                      , total
            from (ord natural join item) natural join product

    does not work either. The optimizer insists on doing a cartesian product between ORD and PRODUCT.

    This is a new bug. It does not exist in Oracle 9i, which evaluates all queries correctly.