Adobe promises patch for zero-day PDF bug by next Tuesday
- — 06 May, 2009 05:06
Adobe has promised to patch the newest zero-day vulnerability in its popular Adobe Reader software no later than next Tuesday, potentially adding another update to the month's busiest patch day for the second time in three months.
May 12 is also Microsoft's regularly-scheduled monthly Patch Tuesday.
On Friday, Adobe's security team announced that it would issue updates to Adobe Reader and Acrobat -- versions 9.x, 8.x and 7.x for Windows, 9.x and 8.x for Mac and Linux -- by next Tuesday.
"Additionally, we have confirmed the second vulnerability (CVE-2009-1493) for Adobe Reader for Unix," he added, referencing a second bug that was reported last week.
"This issue will be resolved in the upcoming Adobe Reader for Unix updates. Currently, we have not been able to reproduce an exploitable scenario for Windows and Macintosh, but we will continue to investigate."
Adobe didn't complete its patching until March 24, when it delivered updates for Linux and Solaris, putting the bug's window of vulnerability at between 19 and 33 days.
By comparison, if Adobe patches next Tuesday, the window for the newest flaw would be only 14 days.
"Their timing is the silver cloud," agreed Andrew Storms, director of security operations at nCircle Network Security Inc. "But it's difficult to see through that cloud."
Storms, who has been critical of Adobe's security process, remained so today. Not only has Adobe set the Reader patch for the same day that Microsoft will roll out it own fixes, but the paucity of information and the lack of security management tools from Adobe continues to frustrate Storms.
"If Adobe had said, here's the risk and here's a way to do this [mitigation] quickly in the enterprise, we'd be talking about a different story," Storms argued. "But they don't give us that information up front."
Adobe wasn't able to immediately answer several questions about the impending patch, including whether the faster pace is a result of more resources devoted to the fix or a side effect of the nature of the vulnerability itself.
Storms thinks he knows: "My guess is that they took some heat last time, and they put more resources on it," he said.
"You can't really criticize software for having bugs, because all software was bugs," Storms added. "But you can [criticize a vendor] for its entire security lifecycle and its lack of tools. That's what makes a difference. Are they going to be on your [security] team or not depends on how they respond to a vulnerability and how they deal with it."
According to Adobe's security advisory, no in-the-wild exploits have been reported targeting the two unpatched vulnerabilities.