Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Currently we have this in plperl.c:
"require Safe;"
I am thinking of submitting a patch to replace this with "use Safe
2.09;" to enforce use of a version without the known vulnerability.
Any objections?
I have none, except will 2.09 work with 5.00503?
I will see about
Currently we have this in plperl.c:
"require Safe;"
I am thinking of submitting a patch to replace this with "use Safe
2.09;" to enforce use of a version without the known vulnerability.
Any objections?
I have none, except will 2.09 work with 5.00503?
cheers
andrew
