sendmail vulnerability

2006-03-23 Thread Andreas Piper
Hello, ISS has reported a serious flaw in sendmail before 8.13.6, see http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/alerts/id/216 and http://sendmail.org/8.13.6.html Is a security fix of the sendmail-package(s) in view, or should I try to install sendmail 8.13.6 standalone? Thanks, Andreas --

Re: sendmail vulnerability

2006-03-23 Thread AnĂ­bal Monsalve Salazar
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 09:44:38AM +0100, Andreas Piper wrote: Hello, ISS has reported a serious flaw in sendmail before 8.13.6, see http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/alerts/id/216 and http://sendmail.org/8.13.6.html Is a security fix of the sendmail-package(s) in view, or should I try to install

Re: sendmail vulnerability

2006-03-23 Thread Andreas Barth
* Andreas Piper ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060323 09:45]: Hello, ISS has reported a serious flaw in sendmail before 8.13.6, see http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/alerts/id/216 and http://sendmail.org/8.13.6.html Is a security fix of the sendmail-package(s) in view, or should I try to install

Re: sendmail vulnerability

2006-03-23 Thread Moritz Muehlenhoff
Andreas Piper wrote: ISS has reported a serious flaw in sendmail before 8.13.6, see http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/alerts/id/216 and http://sendmail.org/8.13.6.html Is a security fix of the sendmail-package(s) in view, or should I try to install sendmail 8.13.6 standalone? Packages for

Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-06 Thread Arnd Hannemmann
Rich Puhek schrieb: Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: It's been discussed plenty on the Debian mailing lists as well as having the package maintainer give an update on the status of the packages that are being prepared/ready at this time... Might suggest checking a bit further before making such a

Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread Jor-el
Hi, In case noone noticed, news of a Sendmail vulnerability appeared on Slashdot. The really interesting piece of the story for me was the portion of the blurb with said ...RedHat and OpenBSD have already issued patches.links to an update from SuSE, too. What about Debian? I

Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread Jeremy T. Bouse
they are all available... Jeremy On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 03:17:16PM -0600, Jor-el wrote: Hi, In case noone noticed, news of a Sendmail vulnerability appeared on Slashdot. The really interesting piece of the story for me was the portion of the blurb with said ...RedHat and OpenBSD

Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread Bernard Lheureux
On Monday 03 March 2003 23:06, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: In case noone noticed, news of a Sendmail vulnerability appeared on Slashdot. The really interesting piece of the story for me was the portion of the blurb with said ...RedHat and OpenBSD have already issued patches.links

Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread F. Beintema
Quoting Bernard Lheureux [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Monday 03 March 2003 23:06, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: In case noone noticed, news of a Sendmail vulnerability appeared on Slashdot. The really interesting piece of the story for me was the portion of the blurb with said ...RedHat and OpenBSD

RE: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread Jones, Steven
, 4 March 2003 12:35 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Jeremy T. Bouse Subject: Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind? On Monday 03 March 2003 23:06, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: In case noone noticed, news of a Sendmail vulnerability appeared on Slashdot. The really interesting piece

Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread Rich Puhek
Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: It's been discussed plenty on the Debian mailing lists as well as having the package maintainer give an update on the status of the packages that are being prepared/ready at this time... Might suggest checking a bit further before making such a rash judgement on

Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread Jor-el
Hi, In case noone noticed, news of a Sendmail vulnerability appeared on Slashdot. The really interesting piece of the story for me was the portion of the blurb with said ...RedHat and OpenBSD have already issued patches.links to an update from SuSE, too. What about Debian? I

Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread Jeremy T. Bouse
they are all available... Jeremy On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 03:17:16PM -0600, Jor-el wrote: Hi, In case noone noticed, news of a Sendmail vulnerability appeared on Slashdot. The really interesting piece of the story for me was the portion of the blurb with said ...RedHat and OpenBSD

Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread Bernard Lheureux
On Monday 03 March 2003 23:06, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: In case noone noticed, news of a Sendmail vulnerability appeared on Slashdot. The really interesting piece of the story for me was the portion of the blurb with said ...RedHat and OpenBSD have already issued patches.links

Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread F. Beintema
Quoting Bernard Lheureux [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Monday 03 March 2003 23:06, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: In case noone noticed, news of a Sendmail vulnerability appeared on Slashdot. The really interesting piece of the story for me was the portion of the blurb with said ...RedHat and OpenBSD

RE: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread Jones, Steven
, 4 March 2003 12:35 To: debian-security@lists.debian.org Cc: Jeremy T. Bouse Subject: Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind? On Monday 03 March 2003 23:06, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: In case noone noticed, news of a Sendmail vulnerability appeared on Slashdot. The really

Re: Sendmail vulnerability : is Debian falling behind?

2003-03-03 Thread Rich Puhek
Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: It's been discussed plenty on the Debian mailing lists as well as having the package maintainer give an update on the status of the packages that are being prepared/ready at this time... Might suggest checking a bit further before making such a rash judgement on