Quoting sbre...@hotmail.com:
I receive daily email from the host which normally shows port audits
and vulnerabilities. However, I did not sport anything related to
CVE-2014-0160 in this email. I expected the same info comes in this
email about the base system as well.
How do you normally
point, since any system can be configured
> to be insecure by a properly skilled idiot, and the kernel hackers can't be
> expected to program around idiotic sysadmins.
>
> So, yes, it is a bug that needs to be fixed. But I don't see it as a security
> issue.
It is a security issue, but perhaps not one of the most critical ones (in
particular it does not allow remote breakins which are generally the most
worrisome kind.)
--
Erik Trulsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
s to have direct access to memory.
The X *server* needs direct access to memory. X clients (like Firefox or
just about any other application using X) does not need direct access to
memory. They don't even need to run on the same machine as the X server.
> A virtual machine
> approa
hat are ALL possible options in /usr/ports too, please?
>
> These are also listed in the ports(7) manpage.
Not quite all of them, but most.
To find *ALL* available make targets and options under /usr/src and
/usr/ports I am afraid one will have to read through
an oversight?
One reason is probably that c_rehash is a Perl script, and Perl is not
included in the base system, so you would not be able to run the script
anyway without first installing Perl.
--
Erik Trulsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-secu
