Bug#658830: libpam-shield: doesn't block any IP when allow_missing_dns=no

2012-07-08 Thread Jonathan Wiltshire
Dear maintainer, Recently you fixed one or more security problems and as a result you closed this bug. These problems were not serious enough for a Debian Security Advisory, so they are now on my radar for fixing in the following suites through point releases: squeeze (6.0.6) - use target "stable

Bug#658830:

2012-05-12 Thread Jonathan Niehof
A candidate CVE has been assigned: 2012-2350 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#658830:

2012-05-11 Thread Jonathan Niehof
Attaching a debdiff between the 0.9.2-3.2 and the fixed 0.9.2-3.3 pam-shield_0.9.2-3.2-to-3.3.debdiff Description: Binary data

Bug#658830:

2012-03-03 Thread Jonathan Niehof
I have backported and tested the fix, RFS is #662076. Note that it still won't do anything without "auth optional pam_shield.so" at the top of common-auth, but it will block with that. Still working on upstream and then bringing in the latest from there, shouldn't be too long. Thanks to Laurentiu

Bug#658830: libpam-shield: doesn't block any IP when allow_missing_dns=no

2012-02-06 Thread Laurentiu Pancescu
Sorry, I forgot the link to the bugfix [1] [1] https://github.com/walterdejong/pam_shield/commit/afa7b246018787fe6028289c414c33292641e1e0 On 2/6/12 10:47 , Laurentiu Pancescu wrote: Package: libpam-shield Version: 0.9.2-3.2 Severity: grave Tags: security With allow_missing_dns and allow_miss

Bug#658830: libpam-shield: doesn't block any IP when allow_missing_dns=no

2012-02-06 Thread Laurentiu Pancescu
Package: libpam-shield Version: 0.9.2-3.2 Severity: grave Tags: security With allow_missing_dns and allow_missing_reverse set to "no" (default configuration in Squeeze), pam_shield doesn't take any action whatsoever, besides logging the IP. If I set both variables to "yes", the IPs are null-