On Mar 12, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2013, at 1:57 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > >> On Tue, 12 Mar 2013, Michael Shigorin wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 06:22:54PM +0200, Elan Ruusam?e wrote: >>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/pld-linux/+bug/1104474 >>>> so, altlinux fixed that problem already in 2009? >>> >>> Erm, let's ask Dmitry Levin. >> >> That fix was for cpio, rpm has its own cpio writer. >> BTW, fix for rpm commited :) >> > > Fix was what: undoing the transaction id suffix'd temp files? > > Tricky to get right on a segfault because of limitations on signal handlers > ... >
If you mean that the patch here was applied to @rpm5.org code http://rpm.org/gitweb?p=rpm.git;a=commitdiff;h=7a9a5505667c681044bacb21c9b84ac66c062fe7 note that the information leakage was fixed a different way, during rpmbuild, by anonymizing all ino_t that end up in a *.rpm metadata as a int32_t. Its just a hash truncated to 32 bits, all that is needed is that all hardlinks have identical ino_t marker, all the fuss about aliasing on a build system ino_t accidental collision is just fuss-o-bout. 73 de Jeff > 73 de Jeff > > >> -- >> Jan Rękorajski | PLD/Linux >> SysAdm | http://www.pld-linux.org/ >> baggins<at>mimuw.edu.pl >> baggins<at>pld-linux.org >> _______________________________________________ >> pld-devel-en mailing list >> pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org >> http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en > > _______________________________________________ > pld-devel-en mailing list > pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org > http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en