Red Hat released new elm package for RHAS 2.1
Christian Pearce
pearcec at commnav.com
Wed Jan 14 20:38:21 UTC 2004
Seth brings up an interesting issue. If we don't have people interested in fixing a package, then it will still be vulnerable. Should we keep track of this in bugzilla? Just create a bug and tag it NOOWNER. Or something like that? This way we don't give people the idea that everything is fixed security wise if you use FedoraLegacy.
Just a thought.
--
Christian Pearce
http://www.commnav.com
seth vidal said:
>
> On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 12:03, Bernd Bartmann wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > FYI: Besides the kdepim, cvs and httpd update for RHES3 Red Hat also
> > released updated elm packages for RHAS 2.1 that fix a buffer overflow
> > vulnerability in the 'frm' command. Please have a look at:
> >
> > https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2004-009.html
> >
>
> If there are admins out there who have users using elm or users who are
> using it who would like fix up a package and submit I'm sure it would be
> just fine. Personally, I don't have any of those users and I don't have
> the sparetime to spend on applications I don't use.
>
> -sv
>
>
>
> --
> fedora-legacy-list mailing list
> fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
>
More information about the fedora-legacy-list
mailing list