[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E130401.3090501@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 20:30:57 +0800
From: Eugene Teo <eugene@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
CC: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
Subject: Re: vsftpd download backdoored
On 07/05/2011 01:25 AM, Solar Designer wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 06:56:57PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
>> IIRC for such backdoored downloads CVE IDs were assigned in the past
>> to properly track the status of distributions providing the affected
>> piece of code.
>
> I suspect that no distributions provide the affected code this time.
> So if affected distributions is the only reason for CVE ID assignment in
> this case, it might make sense to postpone CVE ID allocation until we
> learn of an affected distribution (which we probably won't).
But with a CVE name, it is easier for people to refer to this issue, and
also easier for distributions to publish an official statement.
My two cents.
Eugene
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
