Joel Sing wrote: > Note that that exploit is for versions earlier than 1.1.4.b3 - the > previous ports version was 1.1.4.b4, which one would presume is > patched for this vulnerability. Obviously this assumes that no other > exploits have been found since version 1.1.4.b4.
The audit I was shown stated that vulnerable versions are prior to "1.1.4-bs". These version numbers seem to follow a pattern I don't understand. Would I be correct in interpreting "bs" as later than "b3p1"?
