Re: SSH-1.5-OpenSSH-1.2.3 of debian 2.2 is secure?

2001-05-02 Thread jakemsr
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:08:19PM +0200, Matteo S. wrote: > > I have read that ssh2 implementation of openssh is better secure and the ssh1 > is not secure. Is right? > The ssh2 protocol is better, but ssh1 is not as "insecure" as say, telnet. There was a bug in the portable ssh code, but I'm pr

Re: SSH-1.5-OpenSSH-1.2.3 of debian 2.2 is secure?

2001-05-02 Thread Ethan Benson
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:08:19PM +0200, Matteo S. wrote: > Hello! I have a doubt. The current SSH1 in Debian 2.2 potato is secure? > > I have read that ssh2 implementation of openssh is better secure and the ssh1 > is not secure. Is right? ssh1 as a protocol is less secure then ssh2, but sayin

Re: SSH-1.5-OpenSSH-1.2.3 of debian 2.2 is secure?

2001-05-02 Thread jakemsr
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:08:19PM +0200, Matteo S. wrote: > > I have read that ssh2 implementation of openssh is better secure and the ssh1 is not >secure. Is right? > The ssh2 protocol is better, but ssh1 is not as "insecure" as say, telnet. There was a bug in the portable ssh code, but I'm pr

Re: SSH-1.5-OpenSSH-1.2.3 of debian 2.2 is secure?

2001-05-02 Thread Ethan Benson
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:08:19PM +0200, Matteo S. wrote: > Hello! I have a doubt. The current SSH1 in Debian 2.2 potato is secure? > > I have read that ssh2 implementation of openssh is better secure and the ssh1 is not >secure. Is right? ssh1 as a protocol is less secure then ssh2, but sayin

SSH-1.5-OpenSSH-1.2.3 of debian 2.2 is secure?

2001-05-02 Thread Matteo S.
Hello! I have a doubt. The current SSH1 in Debian 2.2 potato is secure? I have read that ssh2 implementation of openssh is better secure and the ssh1 is not secure. Is right? Thanks in advance! Matteo -- Matteo Sgalaberni| Web: http://www.sgala.com --

SSH-1.5-OpenSSH-1.2.3 of debian 2.2 is secure?

2001-05-02 Thread Matteo S.
Hello! I have a doubt. The current SSH1 in Debian 2.2 potato is secure? I have read that ssh2 implementation of openssh is better secure and the ssh1 is not secure. Is right? Thanks in advance! Matteo -- Matteo Sgalaberni| Web: http://www.sgala.com --

Re: Lprng version question

2001-05-02 Thread Jamie Heilman
Wolftales wrote: > Am I running a version that has the fix for the syslog() exploit? Learn how to read a changelog, it will save you a lot of time and worry, from /usr/share/doc/lprng/changelog.Debian.gz: lprng (3.6.12-8) stable; urgency=high * Apparently the upstream lprng 3.6.15 which the se

Re: Got root?

2001-05-02 Thread Andres Salomon
A few quick searches on google turned up some rather interesting kernel patches... sockfs: http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mbeattie/linux-kernel.html I'm not quite sure what to make of this. Very interesting, but I can't imagine having 1024 numbers/socket representations in a directory is the best way to

Re: Lprng version question

2001-05-02 Thread Jamie Heilman
Wolftales wrote: > Am I running a version that has the fix for the syslog() exploit? Learn how to read a changelog, it will save you a lot of time and worry, from /usr/share/doc/lprng/changelog.Debian.gz: lprng (3.6.12-8) stable; urgency=high * Apparently the upstream lprng 3.6.15 which the s

Lprng version question

2001-05-02 Thread Wolftales
Hello, I currently have lprng 3.6.12-8 installed on my system. The version installed is the one apt-get and dselect import via the source.list. According to a message sent to this list, debian-security@lists.debian.org, by the package maintainer I was left with the impression Debian 2.2r2 is ok.