> 4.21, IIRC. Check the BUGTRAQ. Nobody had provided a full analysis, let > alone exploit, but there was an example of headers making pine _very_ > unhappy (attempt to save the mailbox after any modifications => screwed > mailbox). I didn't attempt to dig in the source - Mark et.al. got such a > "style" that... well, I know more pleasant ways to part with one's > breakfast. And making it SIG11. Igmar - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- test8-pre4: innd fixed? Linus Torvalds
- Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed? Mohammad A. Haque
- Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed? Alexander Viro
- Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed? Mr. James W. Laferriere
- Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed? Alexander Viro
- Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed? Mr. James W. Laferriere
- Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed? Igmar Palsenberg
- Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed? Linus Torvalds
- [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed? Simon Kirby
- Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd... Martin Costabel
- Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4:... André Dahlqvist
- Re: [Danger] Re: test8-p... Horst von Brand
- Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd... Alexander Viro
- Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4:... Alexander Viro
- Re: [Danger] Re: test8-p... Alexander Viro
- Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed? Paul Jakma