** Changed in: vsftpd (Debian)
Status: Unknown = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to vsftpd in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/343738
Title:
vsftpd max username length too small
To manage
Timing out for now. Please reopen if you still want to pursue this (but
it's not quite in the range of SRUs really)
** Changed in: vsftpd (Ubuntu Hardy)
Status: Confirmed = Won't Fix
--
vsftpd max username length too small
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/343738
You received this bug
Any update on this Kenny?
--
vsftpd max username length too small
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/343738
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to vsftpd in ubuntu.
--
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
I'd like to double check this again before confirming hardy PAM is ok
with usernames of this length but unfortunately I seem to have
lost/deleted the test VM where I had this issue setup.
I'll re-create the VM and re-test this issue just to be sure (give me a
couple of days or so depending on
Did anyone ACK 2.0.6-1ubuntu1.2 in hardy-proposed yet? If not, consider
this an ACK from ubuntu-sru; the patch looks reasonable. Thanks!
--
vsftpd max username length too small
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/343738
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server
Patch was originally an FC10 patch applied to 2.0.5 that has been merged
upstream as of 2.0.7. So it applies to hardy's version (2.0.6), and
username length doesn't require to be patched elsewhere in upstream
code.
On the hardy PAM getting along with those long usernames, no, that was
not tested
Has it been confirmed that hardy's PAM version gets along with long
usernames, too? Was it checked that hardy's vsftp version does not make
assumptions about the user name lenght at any different place, such as
string copy operations, file formats, and the like?
--
vsftpd max username length too
** Changed in: vsftpd (Ubuntu Hardy)
Importance: Undecided = Low
** Changed in: vsftpd (Ubuntu Hardy)
Status: New = In Progress
** Changed in: vsftpd (Ubuntu Hardy)
Assignee: (unassigned) = Thierry Carrez (ttx)
--
vsftpd max username length too small
Uploaded to hardy-proposed with minor fixes to changelog (distro should
be hardy-proposed, version should be 2.0.6-1ubuntu1.2)
** Changed in: vsftpd (Ubuntu Hardy)
Status: In Progress = Confirmed
** Changed in: vsftpd (Ubuntu Hardy)
Assignee: Thierry Carrez (ttx) = (unassigned)
--
** Description changed:
vsftpd has a max username length of 32, this is too small for a virtual
hosting environment where the username is a user's e-mail address (if
they have a long domain name etc...)
This issue was patched in FC10 via their patch system and has been
pulled into
Just spotted a slight error in my debdiff. I made my debdiff against
2.0.6-1ubuntu1, failing to notice the -ubuntu1.1 in hardy-updates.
I'll submit an updated patch/debdiff later today against -ubuntu1.1 if
someone else doesn't do so before hand.
TESTING NOTE: Please note that although the
Hey Trent,
Nominations for server-related bugs are discussed weekly at the Ubuntu
Server team meeting [1]. This issue was considered an additional feature
(support for usernames of more than 32 characters) rather than a bug,
thus failing to reach the criteria for SRU.
[1]
Sure, I'll bring it up at the next meeting (tomorrow).
--
vsftpd max username length too small
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/343738
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to vsftpd in ubuntu.
--
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
The list of criteria for a Stable Release Updates are listed in the
following wiki page:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#When
Which category would this bug fall in?
--
vsftpd max username length too small
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/343738
You received this bug notification
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 07:03:14PM -, Kenny Millington wrote:
Bugs which do not fit under above categories, but (1) have an obviously safe
patch and (2) affect an application rather than critical infrastructure
packages (like X.org or the kernel).
Probably. Next step is to find the
Patch seems obvious enough. Accepting for hardy.
Next step is to prepare a proper SRU report:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Procedure
Update the bug report description and make sure it contains the
following information:
1. A statement explaining the impact of the bug on
Any chance of an explanation for the denial for hardy (denied by
Thierry Carrez)
I am also a hosting company and since 6.06 we've had to patch this
ourselves.. we are now building new servers with 8.04 and find ourselves
doing it again - I'm sure we're not in that small a minority.
--
vsftpd
17 matches
Mail list logo
