On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:21:13PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
Hi,
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-16 22:05]:
Thanks for the help. I have made a patch that would fix the possible
buffer overflows. Please check the attached patch.
[...]
if(path[0]!='/')
-
Hi Mohammed,
* Mohammed Sameer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-17 15:53]:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:21:13PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-16 22:05]:
Thanks for the help. I have made a patch that would fix the possible
buffer overflows. Please check the attached
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 04:02:25PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
Hi Mohammed,
* Mohammed Sameer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-17 15:53]:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:21:13PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-16 22:05]:
Thanks for the help. I have made a patch that would fix
Hi Mohammed,
* Mohammed Sameer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-17 22:36]:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 04:02:25PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
Hi Mohammed,
* Mohammed Sameer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-17 15:53]:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:21:13PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
Thanks for the help. I have made a patch that would fix the possible
buffer overflows. Please check the attached patch.
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 02:54:21PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
Just saw it and I have to admit that I'm not really happy
with it. Please just let the code as it is
Hi,
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-16 22:05]:
Thanks for the help. I have made a patch that would fix the possible
buffer overflows. Please check the attached patch.
[...]
if(path[0]!='/')
- sprintf(tmp,%s/translations/%s,DATAPATH,path);
+
Hello,
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:21:13PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
if(path[0]!='/')
- sprintf(tmp,%s/translations/%s,DATAPATH,path);
+ snprintf(tmp,302,%s/translations/%s,DATAPATH,path);
off-by two. Why don't you just use sizeof(tmp)?
Kind regards
Nico
---end
Hi Mohammed,
* Mohammed Sameer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-13 18:18]:
I think I'm missing something.
Why do we need to make it not suid if the daemon drops it (-6 upload) ?
Cause it does drop it via seteuid and as long as the buffer
overflow exists possible injected shellcode could do
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 02:26:47PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
Hi Mohammed,
* Mohammed Sameer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-13 18:18]:
I think I'm missing something.
Why do we need to make it not suid if the daemon drops it (-6 upload) ?
Cause it does drop it via seteuid and as long as the
Hi Mohammed,
* Mohammed Sameer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-14 14:33]:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 02:26:47PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
Hi Mohammed,
* Mohammed Sameer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-13 18:18]:
I think I'm missing something.
Why do we need to make it not suid if the daemon drops
I think I'm missing something.
Why do we need to make it not suid if the daemon drops it (-6 upload) ?
--
GPG-Key: 0xA3FD0DF7 - 9F73 032E EAC9 F7AD 951F 280E CB66 8E29 A3FD 0DF7
Debian User and Developer.
Homepage: www.foolab.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
11 matches
Mail list logo