Hello Christopher,
As Peter already pointed out it is not done to "hijack" existing
threads. It is confusing for the reader to have a different subject
discussed in an existing thread. Please start a new mail with a
descriptive subject line and send that to the list. Thank you.
Regards,
Leonard.
om: "Peter"
To: "CentOS mailing list"
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 12:52:03 PM
Subject: Re: [CentOS] CVE-2016-5195 DirtyCOW: Critical Linux Kernel Flaw
On 02/11/16 13:05, Richard wrote:
> RHEL/Centos-4 is EOL so wouldn't be updated regardless (at least
> under t
On 02/11/16 13:05, Richard wrote:
> RHEL/Centos-4 is EOL so wouldn't be updated regardless (at least
> under the normal EOL guidelines), but it is mentioned toward the
> bottom of that page under "Affected Packages State":
>
> Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 kernel Not affected
It is mentioned bec
G. Halnin"
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] CVE-2016-5195 DirtyCOW: Critical Linux Kernel
Flaw
>
> Dear Sir/s,
>
> Can a crashed centos system be restore to its previous state before
> it crash? And if so, can you please tell me how to do it? Th
On 11/1/2016 6:03 PM, Christopher G. Halnin wrote:
Can a crashed centos system be restore to its previous state before it crash?
And if so, can you please tell me how to do it?
Thanks, your help is very much appreciated.
1) define 'crashed'
2) got backups?
--
john r pierce, recycling bits i
mber 1, 2016 5:05:59 PM
Subject: Re: [CentOS] CVE-2016-5195 DirtyCOW: Critical Linux Kernel Flaw
> Date: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 18:49:56 -0500
> From: Valeri Galtsev
>
> On Tue, November 1, 2016 6:25 pm, Tony Mountifield wrote:
>> In article <5818cd31.4050...@mov
> Date: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 18:49:56 -0500
> From: Valeri Galtsev
>
> On Tue, November 1, 2016 6:25 pm, Tony Mountifield wrote:
>> In article <5818cd31.4050...@moving-picture.com>,
>> James Pearson wrote:
>>> Leonardo Oliveira Ortiz wrote:
>>> > RedHat and Centos 4.x can be explored by t
On Tue, November 1, 2016 6:25 pm, Tony Mountifield wrote:
> In article <5818cd31.4050...@moving-picture.com>,
> James Pearson wrote:
>> Leonardo Oliveira Ortiz wrote:
>> > RedHat and Centos 4.x can be explored by this flaw?
>>
>> See:
>>
>> https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2016-5195
>
In article <5818cd31.4050...@moving-picture.com>,
James Pearson wrote:
> Leonardo Oliveira Ortiz wrote:
> > RedHat and Centos 4.x can be explored by this flaw?
>
> See:
>
> https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2016-5195
In other words, no: RHEL 4 and CentOS4 are not affected by this fla
Leonardo Oliveira Ortiz wrote:
RedHat and Centos 4.x can be explored by this flaw?
See:
https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2016-5195
James Pearson
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 10/22/2016 07:49 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I guess, we all have to urgently apply workaround, following, say, this:
>
> https://gryzli.info/2016/10/21/protect-cve-2016-5195-dirtycow-centos-7rhel7cpanelcloudlinux/
>
> At least those of us who still have important multi user mac
On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 06:30:45 -0500
Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 10/26/2016 05:56 AM, Peter Kjellström wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 17:21:54 -0700
> > Akemi Yagi wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Leon Fauster
> >> wrote:
> >>> Am 25.10.2016 um 15:39 schrieb Peter Kjellström
>
On 10/26/2016 05:56 AM, Peter Kjellström wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 17:21:54 -0700
> Akemi Yagi wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Leon Fauster
>> wrote:
>>> Am 25.10.2016 um 15:39 schrieb Peter Kjellström :
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:06:12 +0200
Christian Anthon wrote:
>>>
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 17:21:54 -0700
Akemi Yagi wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Leon Fauster
> wrote:
> > Am 25.10.2016 um 15:39 schrieb Peter Kjellström :
> >> On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:06:12 +0200
> >> Christian Anthon wrote:
> >>
> >>> What is the best approach on centos 6 to mitig
On 10/25/2016 03:37 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Phelps, Matthew wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:18 PM, wrote:
>>
>>> My manager just told me that upstream has released a patched kernel for
>>> 7:
>>> CentOS package kernel-3.10.0-327.36.3.el7.x86_64.rpm
>>> see http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RH
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Leon Fauster
wrote:
> Am 25.10.2016 um 15:39 schrieb Peter Kjellström :
>> On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:06:12 +0200
>> Christian Anthon wrote:
>>
>>> What is the best approach on centos 6 to mitigate the problem is
>>> officially patched? As far as I can tell Centos 6
Phelps, Matthew wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:18 PM, wrote:
>
>> My manager just told me that upstream has released a patched kernel for
>> 7:
>> CentOS package kernel-3.10.0-327.36.3.el7.x86_64.rpm
>> see http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-2098.html
>>
>> I'm hoping Johnny can get us tha
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:18 PM, wrote:
> My manager just told me that upstream has released a patched kernel for 7:
>
> CentOS package kernel-3.10.0-327.36.3.el7.x86_64.rpm
> see http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-2098.html
>
> I'm hoping Johnny can get us that, hopefully before the end of t
My manager just told me that upstream has released a patched kernel for 7:
CentOS package kernel-3.10.0-327.36.3.el7.x86_64.rpm
see http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-2098.html
I'm hoping Johnny can get us that, hopefully before the end of the week.
mark
_
Am 25.10.2016 um 15:39 schrieb Peter Kjellström :
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:06:12 +0200
> Christian Anthon wrote:
>
>> What is the best approach on centos 6 to mitigate the problem is
>> officially patched? As far as I can tell Centos 6 is vulnerable to
>> attacks using ptrace.
>
> I can confir
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Peter Kjellström wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:29:33 -0400
> "Phelps, Matthew" wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:06 AM, Christian Anthon
> > wrote:
> >
> > > What is the best approach on centos 6 to mitigate the problem is
> > > officially patched? As far
On 25-10-2016 15:39, Peter Kjellström wrote:
I can confirm that c6 is vulnerable, we're running a patched kernel
(local build) using a rhel6 adaptation of the upstream fix.
Ask off-list if you want an src.rpm
Thanks,
the srpm would be very helpful, I'll reply off-list.
Cheers, Christian.
_
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:06:12 +0200
Christian Anthon wrote:
> What is the best approach on centos 6 to mitigate the problem is
> officially patched? As far as I can tell Centos 6 is vulnerable to
> attacks using ptrace.
I can confirm that c6 is vulnerable, we're running a patched kernel
(local
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:29:33 -0400
"Phelps, Matthew" wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:06 AM, Christian Anthon
> wrote:
>
> > What is the best approach on centos 6 to mitigate the problem is
> > officially patched? As far as I can tell Centos 6 is vulnerable to
> > attacks using ptrace.
> >
>
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:06 AM, Christian Anthon wrote:
> What is the best approach on centos 6 to mitigate the problem is
> officially patched? As far as I can tell Centos 6 is vulnerable to attacks
> using ptrace.
>
> There is a mitigation described here
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bu
What is the best approach on centos 6 to mitigate the problem is
officially patched? As far as I can tell Centos 6 is vulnerable to
attacks using ptrace.
There is a mitigation described here
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384344#c13
which doesn't fix the underlying problem, but
On Sat, 22 Oct 2016, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Sat, October 22, 2016 7:49 pm, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
Dear All,
I guess, we all have to urgently apply workaround, following, say, this:
https://gryzli.info/2016/10/21/protect-cve-2016-5195-dirtycow-centos-7rhel7cpanelcloudlinux/
At least those of
On 10/22/2016 07:49 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I guess, we all have to urgently apply workaround, following, say, this:
>
> https://gryzli.info/2016/10/21/protect-cve-2016-5195-dirtycow-centos-7rhel7cpanelcloudlinux/
>
> At least those of us who still have important multi user mac
Am 23.10.2016 um 03:31 schrieb Zube :
> On Sat Oct 22 08:20:24 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>
>> I should have said CentOS 7. Older ones (CentOS 6 and 5) are not vulnerable.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384344
>
> Comment #35 points to a link that doesn't depend on /proc/self/me
On Sat Oct 22 08:20:24 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> I should have said CentOS 7. Older ones (CentOS 6 and 5) are not vulnerable.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384344
Comment #35 points to a link that doesn't depend on /proc/self/mem and
claims to work on CentOS 6 and 5. I'm not qu
On Sat, October 22, 2016 7:49 pm, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I guess, we all have to urgently apply workaround, following, say, this:
>
> https://gryzli.info/2016/10/21/protect-cve-2016-5195-dirtycow-centos-7rhel7cpanelcloudlinux/
>
> At least those of us who still have important multi
Dear All,
I guess, we all have to urgently apply workaround, following, say, this:
https://gryzli.info/2016/10/21/protect-cve-2016-5195-dirtycow-centos-7rhel7cpanelcloudlinux/
At least those of us who still have important multi user machines running
Linux. (Yes, me too, I do have a couple, thank
32 matches
Mail list logo