Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 12 Apr 2006 14:48:52 -0400
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        martinko <martinkov@pobox.sk>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: upcoming release 6.1: old version of some core components
Message-ID:  <20060412184851.GA25677@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <e1jhn4$vhe$1@sea.gmane.org>
References:  <443BAE40.9050704@dial.pipex.com> <001301c65d7f$0b9dab70$dededede@avalon.lan> <20060411203727.GA90177@xor.obsecurity.org> <e1jhn4$vhe$1@sea.gmane.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--/04w6evG8XlLl3ft
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 08:42:44PM +0200, martinko wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 05:46:06PM +0200, No@SPAM@mgEDV.net wrote:
> >=20
> >>=20
> >>
> >>>I can't answer you main question, but I would say that you can bet you=
r=20
> >>>shirt on the fact that there will be no known security issues in the=
=20
> >>>older packages.
> >>
> >>>At least for openssl and openssh you can get latest versions through t=
he=20
> >>>ports.  Not an option for everything -- I see no zlib for example and =
I=20
> >>>don't believe there's a standard cvs port either.
> >>
> >>as for zlib i definitely know, that there are 2 security flaws, which c=
an
> >>lead to problems when invalid compressed data is feeded.
> >=20
> >=20
> > Already fixed as soon as they were published.  Are there other reasons
> > to upgrade?
> >=20
> >=20
> >>my problem also is not the installation of ports/packages/custom compil=
es,
> >>it's more that the operating system components itself are linked against
> >>these older libraries an therefore will contain bugs, which may have be=
en
> >>already solved.
> >=20
> >=20
> > The other side of this is that newer versions are often incompatible
> > (OpenSSL, I'm looking at you), which rules out upgrading the version
> > in a FreeBSD-STABLE branch since it ruins binary compatibility.
> >=20
> > Kris
>=20
> one may wonder why they change very minor version number/letter only, if
> the changes are so disturbing..

It's more that they don't have the foresight and discipline not to
keep breaking interfaces.  This may have changed recently, but I think
their policy is still "until we release openssl 1.0 we make no
promises about compatibility".

Kris

--/04w6evG8XlLl3ft
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFEPUuTWry0BWjoQKURAjU6AKDHnmpAmeKYoLXucAlSl1roY3TCvgCeNPod
NcgNc/oe0O1+IPsJmpjw6kY=
=IIfx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--/04w6evG8XlLl3ft--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060412184851.GA25677>