From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Sep 3 1:24:31 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mailhost01.reflexnet.net (mailhost01.reflexnet.net [64.6.192.82]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D981737B42C for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 01:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 149.211.6.64.reflexcom.com ([64.6.211.149]) by mailhost01.reflexnet.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Sun, 3 Sep 2000 01:23:27 -0700 Received: (from cjc@localhost) by 149.211.6.64.reflexcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA46147; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 01:24:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cjc) Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 01:24:28 -0700 From: "Crist J . Clark" To: Nate Williams Cc: Allen Campbell , Ian Smith , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bad 16550A maybe? Message-ID: <20000903012428.G62475@149.211.6.64.reflexcom.com> Reply-To: cjclark@alum.mit.edu References: <39B19295.3D66E41@verinet.com> <200009030158.TAA01926@nomad.yogotech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <200009030158.TAA01926@nomad.yogotech.com>; from nate@yogotech.com on Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 07:58:26PM -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 07:58:26PM -0600, Nate Williams wrote: [snip] > 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. There are some security fixes that were never backported to 2.2.8. 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. -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@alum.mit.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message