Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
You are right that we should do an update for a point release of lenny
though to address a minor information disclosure vulnerability[1], plus
some other non-security related bugs. However, I'd like to avoid
upgrading to a newer 1.4.x release but backport changes
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 03:02:55PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
You are right that we should do an update for a point release of lenny
though to address a minor information disclosure vulnerability[1], plus
some other non-security related bugs. However, I'd like
Sorry for the late followup, I've been on vacation.
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:21:39PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Hi,
Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
Asterisk maintainers, what should be done about stable? Would it
make sense to update the stable version to 1.4.26.2 in a point update?
On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 10:57:33AM +0200, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
Package: asterisk
Version: 1:1.6.2.0~dfsg~beta3-1
Severity: serious
Tags: security patch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
the following CVE (Common Vulnerabilities Exposures) id was
published for
Hi,
Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
Asterisk maintainers, what should be done about stable? Would it
make sense to update the stable version to 1.4.26.2 in a point update?
(IIRC there's still a performance regression affecting Lenny from
a previous security update?)
This particular vulnerability
Package: asterisk
Version: 1:1.6.2.0~dfsg~beta3-1
Severity: serious
Tags: security patch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
the following CVE (Common Vulnerabilities Exposures) id was
published for asterisk.
CVE-2009-2651[0]:
| main/rtp.c in Asterisk Open Source 1.6.1 before
6 matches
Mail list logo
