[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<MEAPR01MB36548B10EF4F62022D6D91A7EE4AA@MEAPR01MB3654.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2026 03:23:59 +0000
From: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@...auckland.ac.nz>
To: "oss-security@...ts.openwall.com" <oss-security@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: Buffer overflow in /bin/su from UNIX v4
Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> writes:
>I guess because (ir)relevance isn't among criteria for (not) assigning a CVE,
>and because there may be value in having a non-ambiguous way to refer to
>historical vulnerabilities for illustration of how the current ones fit in
>historical context.
... and because it was a bit of fun. Not everything has to be serious, it was
nice to see the CISA folks have a sense of humour :-).
>The 2025 in this CVE is almost certainly wrong, but I understand that no one
>had the resources to figure out the year it was first discovered.
They were unable to assign a 1973 CVE so used 2025, the year it was
(re-)discovered, instead.
Peter.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
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.
