From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 29 22:08:39 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D28FCCA for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 22:08:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan@obluda.cz) Received: from fw.ax.cz (fw.ax.cz [IPv6:2a00:1aa8:1:1000::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07D1E1926 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 22:08:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [172.20.1.29] (host10.hide.ax.cz [172.20.1.29]) by fw.ax.cz (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r3TM8X7u053516 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 00:08:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dan@obluda.cz) Message-ID: <517EEF57.2030106@obluda.cz> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 00:08:23 +0200 From: Dan Lukes User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:20.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/20.0 SeaMonkey/2.17.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-13:05.nfsserver [REVISED] References: <201304292156.r3TLuoGP052344@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201304292156.r3TLuoGP052344@freefall.freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 22:08:39 -0000 FreeBSD Security Advisories wrote: > To determine which implementation an NFS server is running, run the > following command: > > # kldstat -v | grep -cw nfsd > > This will print 1 if the system is running the new NFS implementation, > and 0 otherwise. It output "2" on my 9.1-RELEASE-p2 with new NFSD as output of kldstat -v return two lines containing word 'nfsd': > 6 1 0xffffffff80c14000 2b38b nfsd.ko (/boot/kernel/nfsd.ko) > Contains modules: > Id Name > 202 nfsd Someone may be confused by non 0/1 result not catched in advisory. Either kldstat -v | grep -wc nfsd.ko or kldstat | grep -wc nfsd should be used instead the command recommended in advisory to obtain 0/1 result. Regards Dan