Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 09:57:32 -0800 From: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com> To: Guy Helmer <ghelmer@alpha.dsu.edu> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: named update Message-ID: <199602161757.JAA15558@precipice.shockwave.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 16 Feb 1996 09:15:53 CST." <Pine.OSF.3.91.960216090524.4301D-100000@alpha.dsu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I believe our nameds in 2.05 and 2.1 are fine, they were 4.9.3 beta9. From: Guy Helmer <ghelmer@alpha.dsu.edu> Subject: named update Does anyone know the named version details surrounding the named problem that CERT just reported? I just don't know which version tries to close up the hole. Is named in 2.0.5 and 2.1.0 a vulnerable version? Thanks to anyone who can shed light on this, Guy Guy Helmer, Dakota State University Computing Services - ghelmer@alpha.dsu.ed >>u
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199602161757.JAA15558>