From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Mon Nov 13 17:40:47 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0403DDC01EC for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 17:40:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com) Received: from echo.brtsvcs.net (echo.brtsvcs.net [IPv6:2607:f740:c::4ae]) (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 E691E7663F for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 17:40:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com) Received: from chombo.houseloki.net (unknown [IPv6:2601:1c2:1400:8d31:21c:c0ff:fe7f:96ee]) by echo.brtsvcs.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C90038F89; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 09:40:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from [IPv6:2601:1c2:1400:8d31:ed5f:2adb:97f:1e30] (unknown [IPv6:2601:1c2:1400:8d31:ed5f:2adb:97f:1e30]) by chombo.houseloki.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D74F28A; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 09:40:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: OpenSSL CVE-2017-3736 To: Andrea Venturoli , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: From: Mel Pilgrim Message-ID: <6c8cfb16-f752-05a9-8739-808246f92e8d@bluerosetech.com> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 09:40:44 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 17:40:47 -0000 On 11/13/2017 08:17, Andrea Venturoli wrote: > Hello. > > A little bit out of curiosity and a little bit to plan my work... > > I thought any version of FreeBSD would be affected by this > vulnerability, but heard nothing on the list. > > Am I wrong? Are we safe? > Is a SA coming? OpenSSL in 11.1 is 1.0.2k, so no, no, and yes (hopefully). > > I see devel/openssl was upgraded to 1.0.2m. Are we expected to go the > port way? That's not possible in all cases, but if you can, building with ports openssl is a good idea. Also, you'll need to use head, because security/openssl in 2017Q4 is still 1.0.2l.