RE: remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-29 Thread Simon Matter
> Is 2.0.17 ancient history now and thus I'll be waiting a long time for > a patch to come out? > > ;-) > > Hey, it just works, and well. I hate being on the bleeding edge when it > comes to email delivery. But if I must upgrade, suggestions on what's > uber-stable? 2.2.10 :) > > Thanks! >

RE: remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-28 Thread Joe Mailander
Is 2.0.17 ancient history now and thus I'll be waiting a long time for a patch to come out? ;-) Hey, it just works, and well. I hate being on the bleeding edge when it comes to email delivery. But if I must upgrade, suggestions on what's uber-stable? Thanks! Joe --- Cyrus Home Page: http:

RE: remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-23 Thread Derrick J Brashear
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Michael Sims wrote: No, not necessarily. In fact, I haven't really investigated it fully yet. I just wanted clarification on whether the 2.1.x line was still being maintained/supported. Apparently it is, because I see now that there is a 2.1.17 tarball in ftp://ftp.andrew.c

RE: remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-23 Thread Michael Sims
Derrick J Brashear wrote: > On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Michael Sims wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Are there any plans to release an official 2.1.17 to address these >> issues or should those of us running 2.1.x (who don't wish to >> maintain local patches) upgrade to >> 2.2.9? > > I think we would prefer you upgra

RE: remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-23 Thread Derrick J Brashear
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Derrick J Brashear wrote: Are there any plans to release an official 2.1.17 to address these issues or should those of us running 2.1.x (who don't wish to maintain local patches) upgrade to 2.2.9? I think we would prefer you upgraded, but, are there cases where this would ca

RE: remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-23 Thread Derrick J Brashear
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Michael Sims wrote: Hi, Are there any plans to release an official 2.1.17 to address these issues or should those of us running 2.1.x (who don't wish to maintain local patches) upgrade to 2.2.9? I think we would prefer you upgraded, but, are there cases where this would cause

RE: remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-23 Thread Michael Sims
Derrick J Brashear wrote: > On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, David Powicki wrote: >> What's the word on susceptibility of versions based on the remote >> vulnerability documented at: >> >> http://security.e-matters.de/advisories/152004.html >> >> Are ALL versions of cyrus pre-2.2.9 vulnerable, including 2.1.X?

Re: remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-23 Thread David Carter
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Derrick J Brashear wrote: > The relevant portions of the patch between 2.2.8 and 2.2.9 can be > applied (most likely by hand) to 2.1.x. Here's the (trivial) subset of patches which are relevant to 2.1.16: http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/~dpc22/cyrus/patches/2.1.16/peek.patch

Re: remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-23 Thread lst_hoe01
Zitat von Derrick J Brashear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, David Powicki wrote: > > > > > What's the word on susceptibility of versions based on the remote > > vulnerability documented at: > > > > http://security.e-matters.de/advisories/152004.html > > > > Are ALL versions of cyrus p

Re: remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-22 Thread Derrick J Brashear
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, David Powicki wrote: What's the word on susceptibility of versions based on the remote vulnerability documented at: http://security.e-matters.de/advisories/152004.html Are ALL versions of cyrus pre-2.2.9 vulnerable, including 2.1.X? If you read the report at the URL he summar

remote cyrus exploits?

2004-11-22 Thread David Powicki
What's the word on susceptibility of versions based on the remote vulnerability documented at: http://security.e-matters.de/advisories/152004.html Are ALL versions of cyrus pre-2.2.9 vulnerable, including 2.1.X? -David --- Cyrus Home Page: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyr