Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 08:40:07 +0200
From: Rainer Gerhards <rgerhards@...adiscon.com>
To: Sven Kieske <s.kieske@...twald.de>
Cc: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: vulnerability in rsyslog

2014-10-06 8:31 GMT+02:00 Sven Kieske <s.kieske@...twald.de>:

>
>
> On 30/09/14 18:41, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
> > 2014-09-30 18:28 GMT+02:00 Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>:
> >
> >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 01:55:12PM +0200, Sven Kieske wrote:
> >>> I don't understand the following statement in the
> >>> pri-vuln.txt in section "Patches":
> >>>
> >>> "Version 7.4.6, while no longer being project
> >>> supported received a patch and is also not vulnerable."
> >>>
> >>> What was patched when this version is not vulnerable?
> >>> Or do you mean it is not vulnerable after the patch got applied?
> >>
> >>
> > My apologies, this is a type that skipped past all proof-reading. It
> should
> > say "7.6.6", which is the v7 version released today. v7.4.x is not only
> > non-project supported, it's also heavily outdated and missing many other
> > patches as well (just to point this out).
>
> This still does not answer the above questions, it just changes the
> version number in your statement which led to my question.
>
>
you can view the complete patch set here:

https://github.com/rsyslog/rsyslog/commits/v7-stable

Rainer

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

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.