Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 19:14:42 +0200 From: Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> To: "O. Hartmann" <ohartmann@walstatt.org> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Samba CVE-2017-7494 and SMB implementation of FreeBSD 10 through 12 Message-ID: <F67019CC-9B84-4D2E-B027-214216D3DCFC@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20170530185559.2b94ca1b@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> References: <CAGYSLOcqeqyYgw3BFyoRKO5RcJkmiYFMPT7qps1j-%2BobL2x==g@mail.gmail.com> <F875D26C-F8DA-438F-AE40-8E7B2F5CDC29@FreeBSD.org> <20170530185559.2b94ca1b@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Apple-Mail=_E6B5373A-0FC4-48E9-AD3C-C11B3945C06F Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 30 May 2017, at 18:55, O. Hartmann <ohartmann@walstatt.org> wrote: >=20 > Am Mon, 29 May 2017 23:47:46 +0200 > Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> schrieb: >=20 >> On 29 May 2017, at 18:53, Darko Gavrilovic <d.gavrilovic@gmail.com> = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Hello, does anyone know or able to confirm if Samba CVE-2017-7494 >>> affects Samba 3.6.25 on Freebsd 9.x? >>>=20 >>> https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-announce/2017/000406.html >>=20 >> The advisory very clearly says "all versions of Samba from 3.5.0 >> onwards", so yes. In addition, the 3.x series is dead, and = completely >> unsupported. It is probably wise to upgrade, for example to 4.6.4. >>=20 >> -Dimitry >>=20 >=20 > I'm just curious and to have an answere at hand for my superiors: >=20 > FreeBSD has a SMB implementation we uitlise with FreeBSD 10.3 and = 11.0. Is FreeBSD's > implementation somehow affected by the bug revealed in SAMBA >=3D = 3.6.25? If you mean smbfs, then that is an SMB *client* only, not a server. CVE-2017-7494 is specifically about an exploitable bug in Samba's SMB server component. FreeBSD does not provide any SMB server in the base system. That said, I don't know whether there are any security bugs in our smbfs client implementation. It is really a completely different matter. The code seems to have been largely unmaintained for years, though, so purely on that basis it does not inspire a great deal of confidence. -Dimitry --Apple-Mail=_E6B5373A-0FC4-48E9-AD3C-C11B3945C06F Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.30 iEYEARECAAYFAlktqIoACgkQsF6jCi4glqOoEQCgsn14YyzVu39JvPfboMpv7HiV R7gAniPxPk/mmsyt3yJA0/IJcKy3Yt2n =vLU9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_E6B5373A-0FC4-48E9-AD3C-C11B3945C06F--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F67019CC-9B84-4D2E-B027-214216D3DCFC>