reopen 550379
severity 550379 wishlist
thanks
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:50:04 +0100 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-10-18 at 18:18 -0400, Michael S Gilbert wrote:
> [...]
> > in one sentence, my request is for the linux-2.6 and linux-kbuild-2.6
> > *source* packages to be mer
maybe there is also some confusion due to my use of the term "kbuild
binary packages". i am referring to the linux-kbuild-$(uname -r)
binary packages when i say that, not the plain old kbuild binary/source
package.
mike
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:56:57 +0200 maximilian attems wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 03:40:02PM -0400, Michael S Gilbert wrote:
> > > # explanation given by maintainer
> > > close 550379
> >
> > there is no explanation in the bug logs. the close
> # explanation given by maintainer
> close 550379
there is no explanation in the bug logs. the closest thing to an
explanation is:
This is not possible for other reasons.
where the 'other reasons' are never explained. if someone can state
these reasons, i would be content to give this up i
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 19:47:09 +0200 Patrick Matthäi wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Ben Hutchings schrieb:
> >> Wasting time and bandwidth (fetching linux-headers etc)? Great...
> >
> > Building obscure modules for every kernel flavour on Debian's own
> > auto-builders
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 03:03:06 +0200 Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 05:49:13PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 02:04:20PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > >> the linux-kbuild-2.6 source package includes portions of code from the
> > >> linux-2.6 source pa
On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 12:10:04 -0400 Thomas Krichel wrote:
> Michael S Gilbert writes
>
> > 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' followed by a reboot into the new
> > kernel should bring you up to date.
>
> Since I just download the kernel last week I
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 23:51:40 +0200 Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 12:06:58PM -0400, Michael S. Gilbert wrote:
> > Package: linux-2.6
> > Severity: important
> > Tags: security
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The following CVE (Common Vuln
while this bug is still open, would it make sense to disable the gcc
option/optimization/bug/flaw that allows this vulnerability to exist?
the "-fno-delete-null-pointer-checks" flag will completely disable
this option kernel-wide [1].
obviously there is a tradeoff here. the null pointer optimizat
this is CVE-2009-1389. patches available[1].
[1] http://git.kernel.org/linus/fdd7b4c3302c93f6833e338903ea77245eb510b4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Package: linux-2.6
Version: FILLINAFFECTEDVERSION
Severity: important
Tags: security , patch
Hi,
the following CVE (Common Vulnerabilities & Exposures) id was
published for linux-2.6.
CVE-2009-1914[0]:
| The pci_register_iommu_region function in
| arch/sparc/kernel/pci_common.c in the Linux kerne
Package: linux-2.6
Severity: important
Version: 2.6.18.dfsg.1-24 (and newer)
Tags: security , patch
Hi,
the following CVE (Common Vulnerabilities & Exposures) id was
published for linux-2.6.
CVE-2009-1385[0]:
| Integer underflow in the e1000_clean_rx_irq function in
| drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.26
Severity: important
Tags: security patch
Hi,
The following CVE (Common Vulnerabilities & Exposures) id was
published for linux-2.6.
CVE-2009-1360[0]:
| The __inet6_check_established function in net/ipv6/inet6_hashtables.c
| in the Linux kernel before 2.6.29, wh
On Mon, 18 May 2009 11:52:04 -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 01:28:56PM -0400, Michael S. Gilbert wrote:
> > Package: linux-2.6
> > Version: 2.6.26-15lenny2
> > Severity: important
> > Tags: security
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Th
tag 529326 patch
thank you
note that this affects the lenny and squeeze versions of the kernel
(2.6.26). even though the kernel changelog says that this problem only
affects 2.6.28, it actually affects any version before 2.6.28.9 that has
ecryptfs.
patches are available here:
http://git.kernel.o
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.26-15lenny2
Severity: important
Tags: security
Hi,
The following CVE (Common Vulnerabilities & Exposures) id was
published for linux-2.6.
CVE-2009-0787[0]:
| The ecryptfs_write_metadata_to_contents function in the eCryptfs
| functionality in the Linux kernel 2.6.2
Package: linux-2.6
Severity: important
Tags: security
Hi,
The following CVE (Common Vulnerabilities & Exposures) id was
published for linux-2.6.
CVE-2007-6514[0]:
| Apache HTTP Server, when running on Linux with a document root on a
| Windows share mounted using smbfs, allows remote attackers to
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:50:54 -0600 dann frazier wrote:
> > > The support for dynamically loadable kernel modules in Linux can be
> > > abuses similarly. Does that make it a "grave security issue"?
> >
> > probably...at least until someone comes up with a secure way to do it.
>
> Oh, come on.
>
btw, redhat-based distros are thought to be invulnerable to these
attacks due their incorporation of execshield (in particular, due to
address space randomization). perhaps it's high time that debian
consider doing the same?
i know that execshield is not in the vanilla kernel, but when it comes
to
reopen 524373
thanks
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 16:53:38 -0400 Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 04:21:10PM -0400, Michael S. Gilbert wrote:
> >
> > i think that any flaw that allows an attacker to elevate his pwnage from
> > root to hidden should always be consid
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:43:07 -0400, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:55:05AM -0400, Michael S. Gilbert wrote:
> > as seen in recent articles and discussions, the linux kernel is
> > currently vulnerable to rootkit attacks via the /dev/mem device. one
> >
package: linux-2.6
severity: grave
tags: security
as seen in recent articles and discussions, the linux kernel is
currently vulnerable to rootkit attacks via the /dev/mem device. one
article [1] mentions that there is an existing patch for the problem,
but does not link to it. perhaps this fix c
package: linux-2.6
severity: wishlist
tags: security
there are now several security hardening kernel patches available in
the debian archive (e.g. execshield and grsecurity). it would be great
if these patches were incorporated into the default kernel packages.
this would go a long way toward
Thanks to the debian and upstream kernel teams for fixing this
longstanding bug! It's good to know that the process sometimes may take
quite a bit of time, but it does work!
Regards,
Mike
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:12:05 +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
>
> This is an automatic notification
tag 447549 patch
thank you
one of the upstream developers created a patch for this problem [1]. i assume
that since this is so straightforward it will likely be applied to the vanilla
kernel without too much hesitation (maybe in the 2.6.30 timeframe). i will
watch the upstream list for a comm
25 matches
Mail list logo
