Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email email@example.com
From: Peter Pentchev (roamorbitel.bg)
Date: Fri Jun 15 2001 - 12:10:58 CDT
That 'someone' quoted this same message, and a follow-up, explaining
why someone else actually thinks 4.3 *might* be vulnerable.
-- If the meanings of 'true' and 'false' were switched, then this sentence wouldn't be false.
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:04:44PM +0100, richrdrose.org wrote: > Someone asked about 4.3 being susceptible to this attack.... > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 08:41:13 -0500 > From: Will Senn <wsennpostfuture.com> > To: OpenBSDTech <techopenbsd.org> > Subject: FW: OpenBSD 2.9,2.8 local root compromise > > -----Original Message----- > From: Przemyslaw Frasunek [mailto:venglinfreebsd.lublin.pl] > Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 12:10 PM > To: Georgi Guninski > Cc: Bugtraq > Subject: Re: OpenBSD 2.9,2.8 local root compromise > > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 05:14:46PM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote: > > OpenBSD 2.9,2.8 > > Have not tested on other OSes but they may be vulnerable > > FreeBSD 4.3-STABLE isn't vulnerable. Looks like it's dropping set[ug]id > privileges before allowing detach. > > -- > * Fido: 2:480/124 ** WWW: http://www.frasunek.com/ ** NIC-HDL: PMF9-RIPE * > * Inet: przemyslawfrasunek.com ** PGP: D48684904685DF43EA93AFA13BE170BF *
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomoFreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message