Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 10:26:13 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Cc: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: OpenSSH Advisory (was Re: Much ado about nothing.) Message-ID: <20020626152613.GD65700@madman.nectar.cc> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020626110043.0522ded8@marble.sentex.ca> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020626103651.048ec778@marble.sentex.ca> <5.1.0.14.0.20020626110043.0522ded8@marble.sentex.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 11:10:44AM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > OK, but 2.9.9... is that really the same as FreeBSD's > > SSH-1.99-OpenSSH_2.9 FreeBSD localisations 20020307 No, 2.9.9 is vulnerable; FreeBSD's 2.9 is not. [snip] > This would imply there is a work around, but the talk before hand [snip] deraadt> Bullshit. I know. I think people reading this list already know my opinion on the issue. I'm just happy that it's all out in the open now. Cheers, -- Jacques A. Vidrine <n@nectar.cc> http://www.nectar.cc/ NTT/Verio SME . FreeBSD UNIX . Heimdal Kerberos jvidrine@verio.net . nectar@FreeBSD.org . nectar@kth.se To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020626152613.GD65700>