Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 20:46:30 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Re: heap overflow in procmail On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 09:44:12PM -0700, Tavis Ormandy wrote: > Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > > > > Unless I'm misunderstanding your report, the problem is in the formail > > utility which comes with procmail, not procmail itself. This should be > > clarified in the title of the vuln, perhaps as "heap overflow in > > procmail's formail utility" rather than "heap overflow in procmail". > > I'm not sure what "title" you mean, are you referring to my email subject? > If you are, I think "<problem> in <package>" is pretty reasonable, but > perhaps this is subjective (hah!). Yes, the email subject. "<problem> in <package>" seems reasonable, but when <package> is also the name of the main program in <package>, and the actual vuln is in a secondary program included with it, I think it's confusing. I'm not sure what percentage of procmail users also use formail along with it, but in general, there will be cases where <package> is extremely widely used but the program with the actual vulnerability of is obscure and mostly unused. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.
Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ