-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 27.8k
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
CVE-2024-11392/11393/11394 vulnerabilities #34840
Comments
These vulnerabilities generally stem from specific model class conversion scripts in the However, to exploit the vulnerability, an attacker would have to craft a malicious model and then induce the user to call a specific obscure conversion script on it, which we don't consider to be a realistic attack vector. Since these vulnerabilities exist only in those accessory conversion scripts, and not in core library functions, and because there's no real way to mitigate them without deleting the scripts, we basically just ignore them! |
@Rocketknight1 Get! Thanks for your detailed explanation! |
No probs! Closing for now since this seems resolved, but feel free to reopen or follow up if needed. |
|
@mithunvb These scripts are always contained in I believe removing all scripts following the pattern |
Thanks @Rocketknight1 for the quick reply :) I find 235 files with this pattern |
So, latest versions, there are no plans of removing these scripts from transformers codebase? since we keep updating the versions, every time removing these files is not a neat option.. If the vulnerability is there, guess these should be removed from transformers in upcoming versions. Thanks |
I also work at a company that is very serious about not using vulnerable versions of packages and is giving me trouble about these. If these truly are rarely used utility scripts, maybe they could be shuffled off to a separate distributable, or otherwise be an optional install? As long as you are tagged with these CVEs you may have problems getting used at many bigger companies. |
Thanks for considering/raising the request. I was just coming here to say the same thing, in case it adds additional weight to the request. Our software is deployed at customer sites who follow standards such as PCI DSS. We've already made the change to remove the convert python files, but the CVEs still show in the results of a security scan (AWS Inspector) of our docker images. Our customer(s) may be able to grant an except, but it's a complication and much simpler if the issue can be avoided altogether. |
@Rocketknight1 So to sum things up:
Thank you! |
@noren95 @JSandler right now the conversion scripts are included in the pypi wheels. After some internal discussion, we think we might keep the conversion scripts in the repo but exclude them from pypi wheels in future. Would this be sufficient, or would it still cause vulnerability scanner issues for you? |
I'm pretty sure we should be fine, as long as the scripts aren't distributed in the wheels. |
@Rocketknight1 Thanks so much! Does it resolve all 3 CVEs? |
It should! None of the affected code will be present in release branches / release wheels in future once the PR is merged. However, I'm not sure how exactly vulnerability databases handle this. The conversion scripts will still be present on the |
PR is merged - closing for now, but feel free to ping me here if there are further compliance issues. We don't want this to become a major issue for |
@Rocketknight1 thanks for the fast turnaround on this. I imagine it will take some time to update the vulnerability databases but hopefully the tools catch up quick. |
Thanks @Rocketknight1 for the quick fix.. I can't talk for all kinds of vulnerability scans out there but since its mostly used in production via pypi installs, not having them as part of the install should solve majority of the cases I would assume unless someone specifically using it via cloning and come across this in their scans raise an issue here.. |
That's what we're hoping! The first version without the conversion scripts should be v4.48. If anyone is still experiencing issues with vulnerability scanners or compliance problems after that version, feel free to ping me here or open a new issue. We may reopen this if removing the conversion scripts from release wheels doesn't resolve the problem for everyone. |
+1. Thank you @Rocketknight1 for the fix! Much easier than trying to negotiate with the security side |
@Rocketknight1 when is 4.48 expected to be available on pypi? Thanks |
Hi @mithunvb I don't have an exact release date, but probably within the next 2 weeks. We're overdue for the next release of |
Thanks @Rocketknight1 .. The reason I asked was we are having very difficult exception approval process for every change in the code because of these vulnerabilities( we have removed the files but the scan will report based on pypi release version ).. anyway, if its around 2 weeks, then its ok.. Thanks for the fix |
Hi @JWYang0329 @mithunvb @jesnie @noren95 @elshize, version 4.48 was released today and conversion scripts were excluded. I believe the release branch and release wheels should be vulnerability-free, but it might take some time to update vulnerability scanners etc. |
Thanks @Rocketknight1 :) |
Hey, just reporting back. We deployed the new version recently and Mend is now not detecting any vulnerabilities 🎉 Thank you @Rocketknight1 for helping out with this. |
Feature request
https://vuldb.com/?id.285443
https://vuldb.com/?id.285442
https://vuldb.com/?id.285441
Have these vulnerabilities been fixed in the current version, or are there any plans to fix them in the near future?
And what is the scope of impact of these vulnerabilities?
Motivation
confirm the scope of impact of these vulnerabilities and the fix version
Your contribution
no
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: