In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think the point is that when root is running tcpdump on host A, a bad > guy on host B can create a packet which makes tcpdump on A execute his > code (as root, since that's who's running it). This is not desirable. I would say it is not _acceptable_. The code shouldn't go into our source tree until the known buffer overflow problems have been fixed. It's just stupid to add buffer overflow problems to a program that is always run as root. John -- John Polstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Self-interest is the aphrodisiac of belief." -- James V. DeLong To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Matthew N. Dodd
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Pierre Beyssac
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Kris Kennaway
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Bill Fumerola
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Boris Popov
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Wes Peters
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Julian Elischer
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. David O'Brien
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Bill Fumerola
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Matthew Hunt
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. John Polstra
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. sthaug
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Warner Losh
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Dag-Erling Smorgrav
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Bill Fumerola
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Stephen J. Roznowski
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Peter Jeremy
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Bob Bishop
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Julian Elischer
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. lyndon
- Re: tcpdump(1) additions. Dominic Mitchell

