Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 03 Feb 1997 23:54:49 -0500
From:      Dan Cross <tenser@spitfire.ecsel.psu.edu>
To:        "Daniel O'Callaghan" <danny@panda.hilink.com.au>
Cc:        security@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Patches for 2.1.6-RELEASE locale stuff... 
Message-ID:  <19970204045449.1526.qmail@spitfire.ecsel.psu.edu>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 04 Feb 1997 15:38:46 %2B1100." <Pine.BSF.3.91.970204153722.2570G-100000@panda.hilink.com.au> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Thanks for all the work you are putting in on this.

No problem, this is the most interesting thing that I've been
involved with in days.  :-)

> One thing I'm not 
> sure of is the impact this has on static binaries.  Can you please 
> clarify this, possibly to freebsd-security.

Well, staticly linked binaries are just as vulnerable to attack as
dynamically linked ones.  The problem is two fold with staticly linked
binaries, however, since recompiling the libraries is not enough to
fix the problem, one must also recompile the staticly linked binaries
and link them against the patched libraries.  Hope this helps!

(cc'ed to security@freebsd.org as requested.)

	- Dan C.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970204045449.1526.qmail>