Is there some reason this issue is being ignored? What, you people need to see an exploit before you will even LOOK at it and answer whether it is vuln?
> Can someone please give a straight answer about these PHP security > holes? OpenBSD 3.9 released yesterday had packages supporting: > php 4.4.1p0 > php 5.0.5p0 > are either of these vulnerable? if so, is someone going to release > updated packages (not just ports)? > the php 5.1.3 release: > The security issues resolved include the following: > * Disallow certain characters in session names. > * Fixed a buffer overflow inside the wordwrap() function. > * Prevent jumps to parent directory via the 2nd parameter of the tempnam() > function. > * Enforce safe_mode for the source parameter of the copy() function. > * Fixed cross-site scripting inside the phpinfo() function. > * Fixed offset/length parameter validation inside the substr_compare() > function. > * Fixed a heap corruption inside the session extension. > * Fixed a bug that would allow variable to survive unset(). > thanks > Monday, May 1, 2006, 7:18:50 AM, you wrote: >> Hi. >> I haven't recieved a single test report, but I still get >> letters about asking for an update. How's that? >> This tarball also includes mysqli, fastcgi and hardened php support: >> http://gi.unideb.hu/~robert/php.tar.gz >> On (28/04/06 01:59), Robert Nagy wrote: >>> Hi. >>> >>> Finally after fighting with pear I've managed to create a working update >>> for the php5 port. >>> The PHP guys have changed the installation method of pear to use some crappy >>> PHP_Archive. With this move they broke the installation of pear on serveral >>> linux distros (e.g. Frugalware), OpenDarwin and on OpenBSD of course. >>> Any other crappy package managements where they install files directly to >>> ${LOCALBASE} -- Best regards, paul mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
