From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Thu Feb 18 14:46:38 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@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 B4661AAD916 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 14:46:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mack@macktronics.com) Received: from borg.macktronics.com (gw.macktronics.com [209.181.253.70]) (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 94BF41FDA for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 14:46:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mack@macktronics.com) Received: from olive.macktronics.com (olive.macktronics.com [209.181.253.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by borg.macktronics.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2997A299; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 08:39:32 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 08:39:32 -0600 (CST) From: Dan Mack To: Joe Holden cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CVE-2015-7547: critical bug in libc In-Reply-To: <56C50A0C.5090207@m.jwh.me.uk> Message-ID: References: <20160217142410.18748906@freyja.zeit4.iv.bundesimmobilien.de> <20160217134003.GB57405@mutt-hardenedbsd> <56C50A0C.5090207@m.jwh.me.uk> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (BSF 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 14:46:38 -0000 On Thu, 18 Feb 2016, Joe Holden wrote: > On 17/02/2016 14:07, Daniel Kalchev wrote: >> >>> On 17.02.2016 ?., at 15:40, Shawn Webb wrote: >>> >>> TL;DR: FreeBSD is not affected by CVE-2015-7547. >> >> >> Unless you use Linux applications under emulation. >> >> Daniel >> > Which is supported by ports so at most it should be a ports advisory and > not a FreeBSD (base) SA and therefore not on the website. > > Just my 2p ;) Documenting and putting out security advisiories for other operating systems seems like a bad precedent in general. The same could be said for runniing java applications, windows under bhyve, etc. - *sigh* - if the cross over use is common via a port, then have the port maybe remind users to consult their distribution specific security vulnerabilites prior to running it maybe - which is what they should be doing anyway. That's my two insignificant cents :-) Dan