From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Dec 26 22:35:51 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93AC7D7B;
 Fri, 26 Dec 2014 22:35:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from luigi.brtsvcs.net (luigi.brtsvcs.net
 [IPv6:2607:fc50:1000:1f00::2])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C7042BF1;
 Fri, 26 Dec 2014 22:35:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from chombo.houseloki.net (unknown
 [IPv6:2601:7:2580:181:21c:c0ff:fe7f:96ee])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by luigi.brtsvcs.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B4A6B2D4F9B;
 Fri, 26 Dec 2014 22:35:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:2601:7:2580:181:baca:3aff:fe83:bd29] (unknown
 [IPv6:2601:7:2580:181:baca:3aff:fe83:bd29])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by chombo.houseloki.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 717FB1FA0;
 Fri, 26 Dec 2014 14:35:41 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <549DE2B4.4080806@bluerosetech.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 14:35:32 -0800
From: Darren Pilgrim <list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com>
Reply-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Remko Lodder <remko@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-14:31.ntp
References: <20141223233310.098C54BB6@nine.des.no>
 <549C4D71.6030704@bluerosetech.com>
 <25260C1A-8230-47BD-9FAF-585D2B560303@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <25260C1A-8230-47BD-9FAF-585D2B560303@FreeBSD.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
 <freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 22:35:51 -0000

On 12/25/2014 11:36 AM, Remko Lodder wrote:
>
>> On 25 Dec 2014, at 18:46, Darren Pilgrim
>> <list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/23/2014 3:33 PM, FreeBSD Security Advisories wrote:
>>> IV.  Workaround
>>>
>>> No workaround is available,
>>
>> This was fixed in ports/net/ntp on Dec 20, so a workaround exists
>> in the form of disabling the in-base version and installing the
>> port.  In the future, it would be helpful to mention such.
>
> We talk explicitly about the base system, not about ports. We never
> mentioned them and I do not see a reason to start doing so.

I don't understand why you wouldn't.  It's a legitimate way of 
mitigating non-technical problems with system administration.  For 
example, many organizations make scheduling a reboot harder/slower than 
scheduling the restart of a single service.  Temporarily switching to 
the port in such cases is a very useful bandaid.