From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 14 13:37:24 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 079FE16A4CE; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 13:37:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp.atlantis.dp.ua (smtp.atlantis.dp.ua [193.108.46.231]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B53743D53; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 13:37:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua) Received: from smtp.atlantis.dp.ua (smtp.atlantis.dp.ua [193.108.46.231]) by smtp.atlantis.dp.ua (8.12.6p2/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i8EDbAes083409; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:37:10 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua) Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:37:10 +0300 (EEST) From: Dmitry Pryanishnikov To: Volker Stolz In-Reply-To: <20040914131723.GA63705@i2.informatik.rwth-aachen.de> Message-ID: <20040914162407.J77824@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> References: <20040909133319.A41151@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> <20040914131723.GA63705@i2.informatik.rwth-aachen.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: multiple vulnerabilities in the cvs server code X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting] List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 13:37:24 -0000 Hello! On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, Volker Stolz wrote: >> Type of problem: multiple vulnerabilities in the cvs server code. >> 1) What are current plans to fix these vulnerabilities? > > The related security advisory [SA] was already published in May: > ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/CERT/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-04:10.cvs.asc > (SAs are available from the project's front page). As I read in this SA, this vulnerability was fixed on 2004-05-20, before 4.10 was released, so 4.10-RELEASE isn't vulnerable, right? But portaudit still complains about FreeBSD-491000. Probably, wrong check in auditfile? Also, it would be nice if such an advisories advance kern.osreldate, so auditfile could check this automatically; e.g., I have 4.9-RELEASE-p11, which isn't vulnerable to this problem, but kern.osreldate is still 490000 there. If Security Officer bumps src/sys/conf/newvers.sh, why he doesn't bump src/sys/sys/param.h? Sincerely, Dmitry -- Atlantis ISP, System Administrator e-mail: dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua nic-hdl: LYNX-RIPE