On Sun, Feb 04, 2001 at 01:48:34AM +0100, Robert van der Meulen wrote: > I don't know about Suse/Redhat/others. On RH 7.0 and 6.2 it does not seem to matter as far as the vulnerability is concerned since $ man -l %x%x%x%x 2>&1 |head -1 man: invalid option -- l on both systems. Also, $ ls -l `which man` -rwxr-sr-x 1 root man 34800 Jun 30 2000 /usr/bin/man --- Mate Wierdl | Dept. of Math. Sciences | University of Memphis
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string... Robert Bihlmeyer
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string vul... Robert van der Meulen
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string... Valdis Kletnieks
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string... Ethan Benson
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string... John
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format st... Megyer Ur
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package forma... Foldi Tamas
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format st... Andreas Ferber
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format st... Graham Hughes
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format st... Matt Zimmerman
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string... Mate Wierdl
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string... Roman Drahtmueller
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format st... Kris Kennaway
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string vulnerab... Darren Moffat
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string vul... Seth Arnold
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string vul... Dan Harkless
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string vul... David Luyer
- Re: SuSe / Debian man package format string vulnerab... Darren Moffat