Re: vulnerabilities in CVS?

2004-09-28 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 01:27:46PM +0100, Steve Kemp wrote:
On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 03:46:44PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:

  CVE Name:   CAN-2004-0414, CAN-2004-0416, CAN-2004-0417, CAN-2004-0418,
  CAN-2004-0778

  CAN-2004-0416, CAN-2004-0417, and CAN-2004-0418 were fixed in DSA-519.

  CAN-2004-0414 was fixed in DSA-517.

  So it looks like only 418, and 0778 aren't addressed, these may or
 may not be severe.  I notice that DSA-505 fixed CAN-2004-0396, for what
 that's worth..

No, just 0778. I must admit that I'd lost track of that one - see
#266721. Unfortunately (see my post to -private), I'm unable to do
anything about it for the next few days. An NMU for that would be
welcome, otherwise I expect to pick it up at the weekend.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Further comment on how I feel about IBM will appear once I've worked out
 whether they're being malicious or incompetent. Capital letters are forecast.
 Matthew Garrett, http://www.livejournal.com/users/mjg59/30675.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: vulnerabilities in CVS?

2004-09-27 Thread Steve Kemp
On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 03:46:44PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:

  CVE Name:   CAN-2004-0414, CAN-2004-0416, CAN-2004-0417, CAN-2004-0418,
  CAN-2004-0778

  CAN-2004-0416, CAN-2004-0417, and CAN-2004-0418 were fixed in DSA-519.

  CAN-2004-0414 was fixed in DSA-517.

  So it looks like only 418, and 0778 aren't addressed, these may or
 may not be severe.  I notice that DSA-505 fixed CAN-2004-0396, for what
 that's worth..

Steve
---