Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 20 Apr 2014 06:48:31 +0100
From:      Jamie Landeg-Jones <jamie@dyslexicfish.net>
To:        matt@chronos.org.uk, jamie@dyslexicfish.net, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org,  bdrewery@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: De Raadt + FBSD + OpenSSH + hole?
Message-ID:  <201404200548.s3K5mV7N055244@catnip.dyslexicfish.net>
In-Reply-To: <53522186.9030207@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <534B11F0.9040400@paladin.bulgarpress.com> <201404141207.s3EC7IvT085450@chronos.org.uk> <201404141232.s3ECWFQ1081178@catnip.dyslexicfish.net> <53522186.9030207@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> On 4/14/2014 7:32 AM, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote:
> > 
> > As to the specific question, I don't think his ego would allow a bug
> > in openssh to persist, so even if it does, I'd suspect it's not too
> > serious (or it's non-trivial to exploit), and it's related to FreeBSD
> > produced 'glue'.
> > 
> > This is total guesswork on my part, but I'd therefore assume he was
> > talkining about openssh in base, rarther than openssh-portable in
> > ports.
> > 
>
> As the maintainer of the port I will say that your security decreases
> with each OPTION/patch you apply. I really would not be surprised if one
> of the optional patches available in the port had issues.

Ahhhh. good point. I forgot about third-party patches.

Yeah, if he's not just blowing smoke, that would make the most sense.

I don't reckon he'd leave an exploit open if it was purely related to
the unpatched source - even if there is some quirk which only makes
it only applicable to FreeBSD.

Still, by not revealing it, he's only potentially hurting the users.

I wonder how many blackhats are going to use this thread as a heads-up?

Cheers, Jamie



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201404200548.s3K5mV7N055244>