Bug#695097: sleuthkit: Fails to spot files named with a single dot on FAT filesystems

Package: sleuthkit Severity: normal I don't consider this a vulnerability, but it was assigned a CVE and should be fixed up nonetheless: http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2012/q4/384 Cheers, Moritz ___ forensics-devel mailing list

Bug#695099: rkhunter: Presence of unhide.rb results in spurious warning

Package: rkhunter Version: 1.4.0-1 Severity: normal When unhide.rb (recommended by rkhunter) is installed, this results in a spurious warning because unhide.rb is a ruby script and not a binary file: [09:47:05] /usr/bin/unhide.rb [ Warning ] [09:47:05] Warning: The

Processed: proposed fix for this bug

Processing control commands: tag -1 patch Bug #677650 [unhide.rb] unhide.rb: in `module:LibC': uninitialized constant DL::Importable (NameError) Added tag(s) patch. -- 677650: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=677650 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with

Bug#695099: rkhunter: Presence of unhide.rb results in spurious warning

I have a doubt (sorry, not exactly concerned to this mail ...) Rkhunter only suggests unhide.rb ? or is a Debian decision Thank you 2012/12/4 Frederik Himpe fhi...@vub.ac.be Package: rkhunter Version: 1.4.0-1 Severity: normal When unhide.rb (recommended by rkhunter) is installed, this

extundelete_0.2.0-2.1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2012 13:55:42 -0300 Source: extundelete Binary: extundelete Architecture: source amd64 Version: 0.2.0-2.1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian Forensics

Bug#670815: marked as done (extundelete: Extundelete segfaults when trying to recover files)

Your message dated Tue, 04 Dec 2012 18:32:39 + with message-id e1tfxin-0004pu...@franck.debian.org and subject line Bug#670815: fixed in extundelete 0.2.0-2.1 has caused the Debian Bug report #670815, regarding extundelete: Extundelete segfaults when trying to recover files to be marked as