Hello!
2010/5/27 FreeBSD Security Advisories security-advisor...@freebsd.org:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
=
FreeBSD-SA-10:05.opie Security Advisory
Dmitry Pryanishnikov lynx.r...@gmail.com writes:
Wouldn't just commenting out all references to pam_opie* in
/etc/pam.d/* create a viable workaround?
With my PAM maintainer hat on: yes.
I'm surprised secteam didn't bother to ask me.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
There's a typo for the fetch link:
--http://security.freebsd.org/patches/SA-10-05/opie.patch
++http://security.freebsd.org/patches/SA-10:05/opie.patch
-Matt
On Thu, 27 May 2010 03:25:07 GMT, FreeBSD Security Advisories
security-advisor...@freebsd.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
# fetch http://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-10-05/opie.patch
# fetch http://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-10-05/opie.patch.asc
A typo:
~ # fetch http://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-10-05/opie.patch
fetch: http://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-10-05/opie.patch: Not Found
Correct URL
On Thu, 27 May 2010 12:27:21 +0200
Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no wrote:
Dmitry Pryanishnikov lynx.r...@gmail.com writes:
Wouldn't just commenting out all references to pam_opie* in
/etc/pam.d/* create a viable workaround?
With my PAM maintainer hat on: yes.
I'm surprised secteam
PAM opie implementation was careful enough not triggering this issue. So
no, programs using solely PAM, configured or not configured with OPIE, are
not affected. Programs that links directly to OPIE may be affected,
depending on their usage.
On May 27, 2010 3:30 AM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav
On 5/26/10 9:53 PM, matt wrote:
There's a typo for the fetch link:
--http://security.freebsd.org/patches/SA-10-05/opie.patch
++http://security.freebsd.org/patches/SA-10:05/opie.patch
-Matt
easiest answer is to both fix the notice and make the two names links..
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
=
FreeBSD-SA-10:05.opie Security Advisory
The FreeBSD Project
Topic:
