On Sat, 2020-07-11 at 13:54 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 07/07/2020 17:14, Simon McVittie wrote: > > Control: tags -1 + moreinfo > > > > On Tue, 07 Jul 2020 at 16:50:36 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort > > wrote: > > > On 07/07/2020 11:04, Simon McVittie wrote: > > > > The only application that was believed to be vulnerable to this > > > > in practice is balsa, which only became vulnerable in post- > > > > buster versions; older versions such as the one in buster > > > > implemented their own TLS. [...] > > If balsa in buster is affected by this, then we'll need to hold off > > on doing this stable-update until a matching version of balsa is > > ready, like I originally suspected was going to be necessary. [...] > I have verified that balsa needed a fix, and uploaded it to buster- > pu, see #964860. > > Should we add a breaks to glib-networking?
That seems like a good idea, given that we know the new glib-networking + old balsa combination won't work. Regards, Adam
