Hello,
we have been bitten by something that obvoiusly
is a feature, not a bug, but I do not quite understand
the intentions and reasoning behind it.
I have a host with manual interface and resolver configuration
and an additional interface that should get it's IP address
via DHCP. But only it's
Hi,
shouldn't there be a very urgent BIND update somewhere around? I
understand the latest flaw doesn't impact system security directly.
Nevertheless, it might impact the security of the whole network
indirectly.
- Olli
--
| Oliver Brandmueller | Offenbacher Str. 1 | Germany D-14197 B
On 2008-Jul-10 11:40:06 +0200, Oliver Brandmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>shouldn't there be a very urgent BIND update somewhere around?
There has been a very long thread about this in -security. Leaving
out the trolls and flaming, the salient points are:
- The bind port has been updated to
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 07:44:51PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2008-Jul-10 11:40:06 +0200, Oliver Brandmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >shouldn't there be a very urgent BIND update somewhere around?
>
> There has been a very long thread about this in -security. Leaving
> out the trolls a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
| On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 07:44:51PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
|> On 2008-Jul-10 11:40:06 +0200, Oliver Brandmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|>> shouldn't there be a very urgent BIND update somewhere around?
|> There has bee
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 07:44:51PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2008-Jul-10 11:40:06 +0200, Oliver Brandmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >shouldn't there be a very urgent BIND update somewhere around?
>
> There has been a very long thread about this in -security. Leaving
> out the tro
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 03:17:26AM -0700, Xin LI wrote:
> Speaking as my own: Base system needs more conservative QA process,
> e.g. we want to minimize the change, we need to analyst the impact
> (FWIW the security fix would negatively affect heavy traffic sites)
> and document it (i.e. th
Xin LI wrote:
Speaking as my own: Base system needs more conservative QA process, e.g.
...
rushing into a "presumably patched" state would not be a very good
solution.
I second this opinion. When there is hype all over the net about a new
vulnerability, it is too easy to allow ill-considere
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Snow wrote:
| Xin LI wrote:
|> Speaking as my own: Base system needs more conservative QA process, e.g.
| ...
|> rushing into a "presumably patched" state would not be a very good
|> solution.
|
| I second this opinion. When there is hype all
Le Wed, 09 Jul 2008 15:31:30 -0400,
Mike Tancsa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> Without the module loaded, I can do something simple like
> glxsb0: detached
> glxsb0: (AES-128-CBC,RNG)> mem 0xa000-0xa0003fff irq 10 at device 1.2 on
> pci0 # sh s
> The result of line 1: Invalid argument.
> Th
At 07:09 AM 7/10/2008, Patrick Lamaizière wrote:
I've found, i think. The Geode handles only AES with a 128 bits key.
When setkey/ipsec opens a crypto session, the driver returns an error
(EINVAL) if the key length is != 128. So setkey fails.
There is no way to tell to the crypto framework that
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:25:33PM +0200, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> OK, thanx for clarification. I totally overlooked the updated bind port;
> anyhow, I use base system bind and didn't plan to change that (although
> it might me a good idea, as this situation clearly shows).
You can always us
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:29:55PM +0200, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 03:17:26AM -0700, Xin LI wrote:
> > Speaking as my own: Base system needs more conservative QA process,
> > e.g. we want to minimize the change, we need to analyst the impact
> > (FWIW the secu
>
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:25:33PM +0200, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> > OK, thanx for clarification. I totally overlooked the updated bind port;
> > anyhow, I use base system bind and didn't plan to change that (although
> > it might me a good idea, as this situation clearly shows).
>
> Yo
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:03:24AM -0400, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:25:33PM +0200, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> > > OK, thanx for clarification. I totally overlooked the updated bind port;
> > > anyhow, I use base system bind and didn't plan to change that (although
Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:25:33PM +0200, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
OK, thanx for clarification. I totally overlooked the updated bind port;
anyhow, I use base system bind and didn't plan to change that (although
it might me a good idea, as this situation clear
>
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:03:24AM -0400, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:25:33PM +0200, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> > > > OK, thanx for clarification. I totally overlooked the updated bind
> > > > port;
> > > > anyhow, I use base system bind and didn't plan to ch
At 06:29 AM 7/10/2008, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 03:17:26AM -0700, Xin LI wrote:
> Speaking as my own: Base system needs more conservative QA process,
> e.g. we want to minimize the change, we need to analyst the impact
> (FWIW the security fix would negatively affec
--On Wednesday, July 09, 2008 11:50:25 +0200 Ronald Klop
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:27:26 +0200, Paul Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Ever since I upgraded this workstation to 7.0 STABLE, I have been unable
to reboot with my USB hard drive attached. During the boot
Given the serious nature of the vulnerability, I'm sure this is at the top of
someone's list. Do we have a scheduled release date yet?
--
Paul Schmehl
As if it wasn't already obvious,
my opinions are my own and not
those of my employer.
___
freebsd-s
> Given the serious nature of the vulnerability, I'm sure this is at the
> top of
> someone's list. Do we have a scheduled release date yet?
>From -security :
>Dear all,
>
>Doug just updated the ports tree with the updated BIND ports. If you
>urgently want to upgrade and really cannot wait f
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Paul Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given the serious nature of the vulnerability, I'm sure this is at the top
> of someone's list. Do we have a scheduled release date yet?
See the thread "BIND update?".
Scott
PS: please do not crosspost.
_
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:52:35AM +0200, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hello,
>
> we have been bitten by something that obvoiusly
> is a feature, not a bug, but I do not quite understand
> the intentions and reasoning behind it.
>
> I have a host with manual interface and resolver configuration
> a
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:31:51 +0200, Paul Schmehl
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--On Wednesday, July 09, 2008 11:50:25 +0200 Ronald Klop
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:27:26 +0200, Paul Schmehl
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Ever since I upgraded this workstation to 7.0 STABL
--On Thursday, July 10, 2008 21:47:17 +0200 Ronald Klop
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:31:51 +0200, Paul Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
--On Wednesday, July 09, 2008 11:50:25 +0200 Ronald Klop
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:27:26 +0200, Paul Schmehl
Hello,
I'm attempting quad-boot my notebook with STABLE and CURRENT, both
i386 and AMD64. I installed them manually by booting from a thumb
drive, partitioning the hard disk and extracting the distributions
from ISO images that I had stored on an external hard drive. My disk
layout is as follows:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:09 PM, Carlos A. M. dos Santos
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm attempting quad-boot my notebook with STABLE and CURRENT, both
> i386 and AMD64. I installed them manually by booting from a thumb
> drive, partitioning the hard disk and extracting the distribution
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Peter Wemm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:09 PM, Carlos A. M. dos Santos
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm attempting quad-boot my notebook with STABLE and CURRENT, both
>> i386 and AMD64. I installed them manually by booting f
Dear FreeBSD friends,
Is this behavior, related to dhclient and /etc/resolv.conf.sav, FreeBSD
specific or is it a general feature of dhclient? I might have a use for
it on my debian linux laptop.
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:57:41AM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:52:35AM +0
29 matches
Mail list logo
