Looking at the redhat CVE it looks like *by default config* it is not
vulnerable except from the localhost.
On 03/10/2016 02:37 PM, Alice Wonder wrote:
As soon as RHEL does.
On 03/10/2016 02:13 PM, Leonardo Oliveira Ortiz wrote:
CentOS will provide an update to fix it?
________________________________________
De: centos-boun...@centos.org [centos-boun...@centos.org] em nome de
Alice Wonder [al...@domblogger.net]
Enviado: quinta-feira, 10 de março de 2016 15:31
Para: centos@centos.org
Assunto: Re: [CentOS] CVE-2016-1285 & CVE-2016-1286
On 03/10/2016 07:13 AM, Michael H wrote:
On 10/03/16 14:47, Leonardo Oliveira Ortiz wrote:
Hello.
I think Centos are affected, right?
Some update from Centos?
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Sure looks that way...
https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2016-1285
https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2016-1286
I don't think NSD is impacted, which is what I use for authoritative
nameserver. There's an EPEL package. NSD is authoritative only, which is
why I use it.
No clue about unbound.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
