Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 22:24:12 +0100 From: Lutz Boehne <lboehne@damogran.de> To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UFS Bug: FreeBSD 6.1/6.2/7.0: MOKB-08-11-2006, CVE-2006-5824, MOKB-03-11-2006, CVE-2006-5679 Message-ID: <456762FC.90108@damogran.de> In-Reply-To: <20061124160356.2c215381.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> References: <45656A3B.6000000@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20061123213656.GA26275@walton.maths.tcd.ie> <200611231742.01418.josh@tcbug.org> <4567504E.6040601@damogran.de> <20061124151543.03f06b19.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> <20061124204111.GA3431@owl.midgard.homeip.net> <20061124160356.2c215381.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 [It's just a panic] I was so transfixed on Josh stating that the attacker could as well just mount a filesystem with suid root binaries and how that would be more useful than a buffer overflow in the filesystem driver. I totally missed the fact that we were talking about two bugs where the kernel deliberately called panic() ;). So in this case I'd agree that the panic() is undesirable, but not really a security issue. Lutz -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFZ2L5DbEkl9DbWrYRAus0AJwPEkX240mVIWme//LzHw210kUzKQCffFv1 6KGhWX9L0kzuMxk+JR+GyCg= =RSll -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?456762FC.90108>