From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Sep 3 10:16:19 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.123.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A11B37B423 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 10:16:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nomad.yogotech.com (nomad.yogotech.com [206.127.123.131]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA16120; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:15:50 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate@nomad.yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by nomad.yogotech.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA03829; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:15:49 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate) Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:15:49 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200009031715.LAA03829@nomad.yogotech.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cjclark@alum.mit.edu Cc: Nate Williams , Allen Campbell , Ian Smith , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bad 16550A maybe? In-Reply-To: <20000903012428.G62475@149.211.6.64.reflexcom.com> References: <39B19295.3D66E41@verinet.com> <200009030158.TAA01926@nomad.yogotech.com> <20000903012428.G62475@149.211.6.64.reflexcom.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.34 under 19.16 "Lille" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > The only modifications were to continually upgrade the software such as > > BIND and SENDMAIL where remote root exploits were possible, but > > otherwise it's a stock FreeBSD 2.2.8 system. (No X, of course.) > > I assume you mean it is a FreeBSD 2.2.8-STABLE. Right. > There are some > security fixes that were never backported to 2.2.8. True, but none of them involve remote root exploits, only local root exploits. (The TCP/IP stack ones I acctually backported). > I hope you don't have /proc mounted for example. If it's 2.2.8-RELEASE > there are more things to be fixed. If security is a concern on this > platform, the fact that security fixes have not been and will no > longer be backported is something to consider. Given it's not a machine that can be logged into (except by the sys-admin), it's really not a concern. *IF* the box had usable local accounts, then it would be a concern. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message