From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 29 13:11:33 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C968637B401 for ; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:11:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from bran.mc.mpls.visi.com (bran.mc.mpls.visi.com [208.42.156.103]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30FD743FB1 for ; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:11:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hawkeyd@visi.com) Received: from sheol.localdomain (hawkeyd-fw.dsl.visi.com [208.42.101.193]) by bran.mc.mpls.visi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FC114E86; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 15:11:32 -0600 (CST) Received: (from hawkeyd@localhost) by sheol.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2TLBVk13733; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 15:11:31 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from hawkeyd) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 15:11:31 -0600 From: D J Hawkey Jr To: Mike Tancsa Message-ID: <20030329151131.B13660@sheol.localdomain> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030329143542.037b1600@marble.sentex.ca> <5.2.0.9.0.20030329144414.0786c4c8@marble.sentex.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030329144414.0786c4c8@marble.sentex.ca>; from mike@sentex.net on Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 02:45:59PM -0500 cc: security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Security fix (Fwd: sendmail 8.12.9 available X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: hawkeyd@visi.com List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting] List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 21:12:05 -0000 On Mar 29, at 02:45 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > At 02:36 PM 29/03/2003 -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > > From bugtraq :-( > > And just a few minutes later, the kind people at sendmail have mfc'd it to > RELENG_4. Thanks! I see that RELENG_4_6 and RELENG_4_5 got or are getting MFC'd, too. Will there be an SA (with the customary SA patchfiles) for this? I want to patch some RELENG_4_5 machines, rather than cvsup(1) them, because I've patched them for SA-03:01 through SA-03:06. cvsup(1) will revert/overwrite all those patches, right? SA-03:04 was for sendmail, and the patchfile for RELENG_4_6 applied to RELENG_4_5 with just a few [sic] "fuzzy lines". I know I'm on my own in supporting RELENG_4_5, but the right tools (a patchfile, even if for RELENG_4_6) would make the job a lot easier. Thanks, Dave -- ______________________ ______________________ \__________________ \ D. J. HAWKEY JR. / __________________/ \________________/\ hawkeyd@visi.com /\________________/ http://www.visi.com/~hawkeyd/