On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 09:40:12 +0200, Michael B Allen wrote: > > Reid Priedhorsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 2. It had security problems. > > > > This brings me to my question: Does anyone have any solid references > > on these security problems? Googling and searching the bug database > > only yielded a vague claim about a remote exploit (bug #247585). > > Well X in general has exploits and if you run a *dm session manager it's > running as root. So if you're running Xprint you're running X so an > exploit in Xprint is somewhat redundant. The bottom line is you cannot > run X exposed to hostile networks.
Hm, I suppose I was unclear. It was the "PostScript/default" printing option, the one that was removed, not Xprint, that supposedly has security issues. I'm trying to solidify these claims. Reid -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
