From owner-freebsd-security Sun May 31 23:56:12 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA12675 for freebsd-security-outgoing; Sun, 31 May 1998 23:56:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from alpha.sea-to-sky.net (sreid@sea-to-sky.net [204.244.200.240]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA12664 for ; Sun, 31 May 1998 23:56:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sreid@alpha.sea-to-sky.net) Received: (from sreid@localhost) by alpha.sea-to-sky.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) id XAA07184; Sun, 31 May 1998 23:56:23 -0700 Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 23:56:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Steve Reid To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: /usr/sbin/named Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Is /usr/sbin/named as distributed with FreeBSD 2.2.6-RELEASE vulnerable to known exploits? Strings shows the version as 4.9.6-REL and a recent Bugtraq post listed this version as exploitable. However, although the _version_ is the same between my 2.2.6-RELEASE and 2.2.5-RELEASE machines, the _dates_ are different. Is /usr/sbin/named in 2.2.6-RELEASE fixed? Also... Is there any reason for this daemon to run as root, other than binding to port 53? Would it be possible and reasonable to patch it to give up root after binding to the port? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message