Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 13:13:30 +0100 (CET) From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Trond_Endrest=F8l?= <Trond.Endrestol@fagskolen.gjovik.no> To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r277806 - head/sys/dev/vt Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.11.1501281311470.1375@mail.fig.ol.no> In-Reply-To: <693b2987.2b23d5b0@fabiankeil.de> References: <CAA3htvspjiDV9_-fwwzLpjYZuA1fG1F3O0_sD02DvcL8b60bGg@mail.gmail.com> <693b2987.2b23d5b0@fabiankeil.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 11:49+0100, Fabian Keil wrote: > Pawel Biernacki <pawel.biernacki@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I found very worrying statement in that document: > > > > "2015-01-27: FreeBSD informs us that after going through their mail archive > > they found out that the same issue was reported by Google and that they > > missed it." > > > > How many other such mails were missed? > > I can't answer this question, but I reported a couple of ggated issues > (DoS, non-critical memory disclosure) in December: > > 2014-12-09: Initial notification sent with potential patches. > 2014-12-18: The mail was acknowledged and additional information requested. > 2014-12-19: A more verbose description of the issue was sent as requested. > 2015-01-15: I asked for a status update, preferably before FOSDEM. > > I haven't heard back yet and don't know when the issues will be addressed. Just out of curiosity, shouldn't size_t be used for indexing? -- +-------------------------------+------------------------------------+ | Vennlig hilsen, | Best regards, | | Trond Endrestøl, | Trond Endrestøl, | | IT-ansvarlig, | System administrator, | | Fagskolen Innlandet, | Gjøvik Technical College, Norway, | | tlf. mob. 952 62 567, | Cellular...: +47 952 62 567, | | sentralbord 61 14 54 00. | Switchboard: +47 61 14 54 00. | +-------------------------------+------------------------------------+ From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 28 19:40:05 2015 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG> Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93917193 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 19:40:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx5.roble.com (mx5.roble.com [206.40.34.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx5.roble.com", Issuer "mx5.roble.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 816CD15C for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 19:40:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from secure.postconf.com (mx5.roble.com [206.40.34.5]) by mx5.roble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D2866784E for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 11:39:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <mailman.92.1422446402.71362.freebsd-security@freebsd.org> References: <mailman.92.1422446402.71362.freebsd-security@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 11:39:20 -0800 Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-15:02.kmem From: "Roger Marquis" <marquis@roble.com> To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Reply-To: marquis@roble.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 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: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 19:40:05 -0000 >> If SCTP is NOT compiled in the kernel, are you still vulnerable ? > > No -- we should have mentioned that too. For GENERIC kernel however > SCTP is compiled in. Should probably fix that too, in GENERIC, considering how little used this protocol is. Roger Marquis
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.11.1501281311470.1375>