hey folks,
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 04:33:52PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> sean finney wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 09:39:10AM +0100, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > > Wasn't it the one where a privilege granted to "table_name" also grants
> > > rights on "tableXname", "tableYname" as '_' was
Hello
On 2005-03-20 sean finney wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 04:33:52PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > sean finney wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 09:39:10AM +0100, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > > > Wasn't it the one where a privilege granted to "table_name" also
> > > > grants rights on
sean finney wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 09:39:10AM +0100, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > Wasn't it the one where a privilege granted to "table_name" also grants
> > rights on "tableXname", "tableYname" as '_' was considered as something
> > like a dot in a RegEx? This should be fairly easy to te
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 09:39:10AM +0100, Christian Hammers wrote:
> Wasn't it the one where a privilege granted to "table_name" also grants
> rights on "tableXname", "tableYname" as '_' was considered as something
> like a dot in a RegEx? This should be fairly easy to test.
i knew it had somethin
Hello Sean
On 2005-03-11 sean finney wrote:
> i believe the attached patch fixes the vulnerability. i took the redhat
> src rpm patch "mysql-3.23.58-security.patch", removed the parts of the
> patch that are already addressed by other DSA's, adjusted some line
> numbers, and did a little extra ma
tags 285276 patch
tags 296674 patch
thanks
hi,
i believe the attached patch fixes the vulnerability. i took the redhat
src rpm patch "mysql-3.23.58-security.patch", removed the parts of the
patch that are already addressed by other DSA's, adjusted some line
numbers, and did a little extra massag
6 matches
Mail list logo
