From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Nov 18 08:52:32 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B97761E6
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:52:32 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from andrej@brodnik.org)
Received: from svarun.brodnik.org (www.brodnik.org [193.77.156.167])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7198F8FC0C
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:52:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from AndyMac.gotska.brodnik.org (AndyMac.gotska.brodnik.org
 [192.168.127.7])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by svarun.brodnik.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9CDF4AC49
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Sun, 18 Nov 2012 09:45:19 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <50A8A035.3030304@brodnik.org>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 09:45:41 +0100
From: "Andrej (Andy) Brodnik" <andrej@brodnik.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5;
 rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Recent security announcement and csup/cvsup?
References: <20121117150556.GE24320@in-addr.com>
 <20121117234248.GB11298@redundancy.redundancy.org>
In-Reply-To: <20121117234248.GB11298@redundancy.redundancy.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 13:20:50 +0000
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
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: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:52:32 -0000

I agree, but there is signature system, which with addition of 
appropriate SW (e.g. built in in ports fetch/update/ ...) provides the 
required security.

LPA

Dne 11/18/12 12:42 AM, piše David Thiel:
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 10:05:33AM -0500, Gary Palmer wrote:
>> Can someone explain why the cvsup/csup infrastructure is considered insecure
>> if the person had access to the *package* building cluster?  Is it because
>> the leaked key also had access to something in the chain that goes to cvsup,
>> or is it because the project is not auditing the cvsup system and so the
>> default assumption is that it cannot be trusted to not be compromised?
> Regardless of the circumstances of the incident, use of cvsup/csup has
> always been horrendously dangerous. People should regard any code
> retrieved over this channel to have been potentially compromised by a
> network attacker.
>
> Portsnap. Srsly.
>
> -David
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"