On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Matthew Finkel <matthew.fin...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 05:53:44PM +0800, J?n Zahornadsk? wrote: >> On 04/10/2014 05:03 PM, Adam Carter wrote: >> > >> > What surprises me here is OpenSSH. It's not supposed to use OpenSSL >> > but Debian update process suggests to restart it after updating >> > OpenSSL to a fixed version. Is it an overkill on their part? It >> > might confuse admins. >> > >> > >> > adam@proxy ~ $ ldd /usr/sbin/sshd >> > linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fffb068e000) >> > libwrap.so.0 => /lib64/libwrap.so.0 (0x00007f68db1e6000) >> > libpam.so.0 => /lib64/libpam.so.0 (0x00007f68dafd8000) >> > libcrypto.so.1.0.0 => /usr/lib64/libcrypto.so.1.0.0 >> > (0x00007f68dabf5000) >> > libutil.so.1 => /lib64/libutil.so.1 (0x00007f68da9f2000) >> > libz.so.1 => /lib64/libz.so.1 (0x00007f68da7db000) >> > libcrypt.so.1 => /lib64/libcrypt.so.1 (0x00007f68da5a4000) >> > libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007f68da387000) >> > libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007f68d9fd7000) >> > libgcc_s.so.1 => >> > /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.8.2/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00007f68d9dc0000) >> > libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x00007f68d9bbc000) >> > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f68db3f1000) >> > adam@proxy ~ $ qfile /usr/lib64/libcrypto.so.1.0.0 >> > dev-libs/openssl (/usr/lib64/libcrypto.so.1.0.0) >> > adam@proxy ~ $ >> > >> > So OpenSSH clearly IS using OpenSSL, and you need to restart sshd after >> > upgrading OpenSSL. >> >> As far as I know, it doesn't use it for the communication itself, just >> some key generations, so it shouldn't be affected by this bug. But I >> guess better safe than sorry... >> > > Right. heartbleed does not directly affect openssh, but openssh uses > openssl and it's good practice to keep the shared libraries on-disk and > the shared libraries in-memory in sync. >
How is OpenSSH not affected?
