Bug#488630: linuxdcpp: Two remote DoS

2008-07-02 Thread Moritz Muehlenhoff
Romain Beauxis wrote: Le Monday 30 June 2008 11:18:18 Steffen Joeris, vous avez écrit : Of course, you can expect a quick upload otherwise. Thanks for the information. However, we are still distributing the package in our archives at the moment. It might be a good idea to fix the issue

Bug#488630: linuxdcpp: Two remote DoS

2008-07-02 Thread Romain Beauxis
Hi ! Le Wednesday 02 July 2008 23:13:52 Moritz Muehlenhoff, vous avez écrit : Besides, I don't want to upload again with the SSL issue. First time it was by mistake, now that I'm aware of it, I wouldn't like to do it on purpose. Can you make a separate RC bug about the SSL license

Bug#488630: linuxdcpp: Two remote DoS

2008-06-30 Thread Steffen Joeris
Package: linuxdcpp Version: 1.0.1-1 Severity: grave Tags: security, patch Justification: user security hole Hi The following email came over one of the security lists: Hey, Linux DC++ (linuxdcpp) is a Direct Connect client based on the same client code as DC++, so it is vulnerable to the

Bug#488630: linuxdcpp: Two remote DoS

2008-06-30 Thread Romain Beauxis
Le Monday 30 June 2008 09:53:15 Steffen Joeris, vous avez écrit : The patchsets are not included in the current sid version. CVE ids for both DoS are pending. Please also upload with high urgency, so that the package hits testing soon. Thanks for the report. However, I have an issue with

Bug#488630: linuxdcpp: Two remote DoS

2008-06-30 Thread Steffen Joeris
Hi Romain On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:53:10 am Romain Beauxis wrote: Le Monday 30 June 2008 09:53:15 Steffen Joeris, vous avez écrit : The patchsets are not included in the current sid version. CVE ids for both DoS are pending. Please also upload with high urgency, so that the package hits

Bug#488630: linuxdcpp: Two remote DoS

2008-06-30 Thread Romain Beauxis
Le Monday 30 June 2008 11:18:18 Steffen Joeris, vous avez écrit : Of course, you can expect a quick upload otherwise. Thanks for the information. However, we are still distributing the package in our archives at the moment. It might be a good idea to fix the issue in unstable and let it