Re: Question about security bug fixes for in-tree NSD

2012-09-21 Thread Mathieu Simon
Am 21.09.2012 14:51, schrieb Stuart Henderson: > CVE-2012-2979 isn't relevant as it's a non-standard > build option that we don't use. Good to know, thanks. >> I have not found a patch for in 5.1 erratas so far. > I've just committed a fix for CVE-2012-2978 to 5.1-stable, > but I don't have time to

Re: Question about security bug fixes for in-tree NSD

2012-09-21 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2012-09-20, Mathieu Simon wrote: > G'day > > This is my first post to this list - so bear with me... > > OpenBSD has not yet replaced BIND with NSD + Unbound, but NSD 3.2.9 is > enabled in 5.1 builds. This version has at least 2 known CVE's that > have been fixed with upstream releases: > > 3.2

Question about security bug fixes for in-tree NSD

2012-09-20 Thread Mathieu Simon
G'day This is my first post to this list - so bear with me... OpenBSD has not yet replaced BIND with NSD + Unbound, but NSD 3.2.9 is enabled in 5.1 builds. This version has at least 2 known CVE's that have been fixed with upstream releases: 3.2.12: Fix for VU#624931 CVE-2012-2978: NSD denial of