Timely update via Hackernews:
<hardenedbsd.org/article/shawn-webb/2016-08-07/vulnerability-update-libarchive>
Note in particular:
"FreeBSD is still vulnerable to the portsnap, freebsd-update, bspatch,
and libarchive vulnerabilities."
Not sure why the portsec team has not commented or published an advisory
(possibly because the freebsd list spam filters are so bad that
subscriptions are being blocked) but from where I sit it seems that
those exposed should consider:
cd /usr/ports
svn{lite} co https://svn.FreeBSD.org/ports/head /usr/ports
make index
rm -rf /usr/sbin/portsnap /var/db/portsnap/*
I'd also be interested in hearing from hardenedbsd users regarding
the pros and cons of cutting over to that distribution.
Roger
On 2016-07-29 09:00, Julian Elischer wrote:
not sure if you've been contacted privately, but I believe the answer is
"we're working on it"
My concerns are as follows:
1. This is already out there, and FreeBSD users haven't been alerted that
they should avoid running freebsd-update/portsnap until the problems are
fixed.
2. There was no mention in the bspatch advisory that running
freebsd-update to "fix" bspatch would expose systems to MITM attackers who
are apparently already in operation.
3. Strangely, the "fix" in the advisory is incomplete and still permits
heap corruption, even though a more complete fix is available. That's
what prompted my post. If FreeBSD learned of the problem from the same
source document we all did, which seems likely given the coincidental
timing of an advisory for a little-known utility a week or two after that
source document appeared, then surely FreeBSD had the complete fix
available.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
