oss-security - R: Re: vsftpd download backdoored

Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 05:22:45 +0000
From: "pinto.elia@...il.com" <pinto.elia@...il.com>
To: "oss-security@...ts.openwall.com" <oss-security@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: R: Re: vsftpd download backdoored

Sorry for not quoting. Just for Info rpm5 have all the necessary for embedding all these check in a spec file from years. Regards. Elia
----Messaggio originale----
Da: Moritz Muehlenhoff
Inviato:  04/07/2011, 18:56 
A: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Oggetto: Re: [oss-security] vsftpd download backdoored



Solar Designer wrote:

> Here's a great example of why maintainers should sign their release
> tarballs, why distributions should insist on that, and why they should
> actually check the signatures indeed.
> 
> I think we should be referring to this when convincing people to do that
> (I had moderate success so far - some projects started signing their
> tarballs after my suggestions/requests, some did not).
> 
> http://scarybeastsecurity.blogspot.com/2011/07/alert-vsftpd-download-backdoored.html
> 
> New vsftpd homepage:
> 
> https://security.appspot.com/vsftpd.html

IIRC for such backdoored downloads CVE IDs were assigned in the past
to properly track the status of distributions providing the affected 
piece of code. 

Can someone please assign an ID for this?

Cheers,
        Moritz

Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.