Am 2011-03-21 um 03:24 schrieb Matthew Fulmer:
> As demonstrated by the VMMaker team, SqueakSource has a rather
> serious security vunerability:
>
> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7617
>
> Below is the dialog that led to this discovery:
>
Note that SqueakSource 2 and 3 are unaffected of t
On Mar 21, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Tobias Pape wrote:
> Am 2011-03-21 um 03:24 schrieb Matthew Fulmer:
>
>> As demonstrated by the VMMaker team, SqueakSource has a rather
>> serious security vunerability:
>>
>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7617
>>
>> Below is the dialog that led to this discov
It's surprising to me that you find this "news".
SqueakSource is simply a WebDAV server. All the versioning logic is local,
implemented in Monticello, so allowing overwrites is not really SqueakSource's
"fault". Besides, even if SqueakSource disallowed overwriting a version (which
it probably
On 21 Mar 2011, at 11:20, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> SqueakSource is simply a WebDAV server. All the versioning logic is local,
> implemented in Monticello, so allowing overwrites is not really
> SqueakSource's "fault". Besides, even if SqueakSource disallowed overwriting
> a version (which it
On Mar 21, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
>
> On 21 Mar 2011, at 11:20, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>
>> SqueakSource is simply a WebDAV server. All the versioning logic is local,
>> implemented in Monticello, so allowing overwrites is not really
>> SqueakSource's "fault". Beside
On 21.03.2011, at 12:40, Marcus Denker wrote:
>
> On Mar 21, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
>
>>
>> On 21 Mar 2011, at 11:20, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>>
>>> SqueakSource is simply a WebDAV server. All the versioning logic is local,
>>> implemented in Monticello, so allowing
