Re: OpenSSL 0.9.7a seems to be vulnerable (was: Re: LKM Trojan)

[Thomas Skybakmoen]

May I ask why openssl 0.9.7a is used and not the latest, when looking at the rate of when
packages are updated in Fedora this is close to the only one beeing held back..why?

Thomas

OpenSSL 0.9.7a seems to be vulnerable (was: Re: LKM Trojan)

[Alex White]

thomas.skybakmoen(a)runbox.no wrote:
>  May I ask why openssl 0.9.7a is used and not the latest, when looking
> at the rate of when packages are updated in Fedora this is close to the only one beeing
> held back..why?
>  
>  Thomas
>   
Have you looked at the changelog in openssl? Any security issues 
are backported to the rpm and the name remains the same.

HTH

Alex White

OpenSSL 0.9.7a seems to be vulnerable (was: Re: LKM Trojan)

[Thomas Skybakmoen]

>  thomas.skybakmoen(a)runbox.no wrote:
>  > May I ask why openssl 0.9.7a is used and not the latest, when looking at the rate of
> when packages are updated in Fedora this is close to the only one beeing held back..why?
>  > 
>  > Thomas
>  > 
>  
>  Have you looked at the changelog in openssl? Any security issues 
>  are backported to the rpm and the name remains the same.
>  
>  HTH
>  
>  Alex White
>   
Yes, one can do this with all packages.. but it still does not answer my question...

OpenSSL 0.9.7a seems to be vulnerable (was: Re: LKM Trojan)

[ne...]

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 17:24:01 +0100 (CET), thomas.skybakmoen(a)runbox.no
<thomas.skybakmoen(a)runbox.no&gt; wrote:
>  > thomas.skybakmoen(a)runbox.no wrote:
>  > > May I ask why openssl 0.9.7a is used and not the latest, when looking at the
> rate of when packages are updated in Fedora this is close to the only one beeing held
> back..why?
>  > >
>  >
>  > Have you looked at the changelog in openssl? Any security issues
>  > are backported to the rpm and the name remains the same.
>  >
>  > HTH
>  Yes, one can do this with all packages.. but it still does not answer my question...
Within point releases of openssl, the API/ABI has been known
to change. Don't ask where I read this 'cause I cannot remember.

N.Emile...
-- 
Registered Linux User # 125653 (http://counter.li.org)
Certified: 75% bastard, 42% of which is tard. 
http://www.thespark.com/bastardtest

OpenSSL 0.9.7a seems to be vulnerable (was: Re: LKM Trojan)

[James McKenzie]

thomas.skybakmoen(a)runbox.no wrote:
>  May I ask why openssl 0.9.7a is used and not the latest, when looking
> at the rate of when packages are updated in Fedora this is close to the only one beeing
> held back..why?
>  
>  Thomas
>   
Thomas:

The version of OpenSSL is patched for the known problems with 0.9.7a.  I 
agree that the current version # should be used when the test cycle is 
started and then the patch level increased.  Also, a changelog would 
help greatly when determining if a CVE is addressed.

-- 
James McKenzie

bittorrent powered UP2DATE

[scootgirl.com]

Hi,

while trying to update using the gui up2date tool I got this error:


"Error while retrieving package kdebase-3.3.1-4.3.FC3.
The message was:

An HTTP error occurred:
URL: 
http://ftp.ussg.iu.edu/linux/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386//kdebase-3....
Status Code: 404
Error Message: Not Found"


Which makes me think about how kewl this update system with notification is. 
However, I think about how this might dry out with all the bandwidth of 
people using this tool or it turning subscription.

If it were possible, I'd be OK with getting updates via bittorrent, and like 
keeping that connection open for a while after each d/l.

Is this currently possible now? Should it be implemented if not?

Thanks for reading this.

Karen
http://scootgirl.com/

bittorrent powered UP2DATE

[Alexander Dalloz]

Am Do, den 16.12.2004 schrieb scootgirl.com um 4:04:

Please don't hijack foreign threads by replying to other list mails
while starting a brand new topic. You mail is now an "answer" to "Re:
OpenSSL 0.9.7a seems to be vulnerable (was: Re: LKM Troja".


>  while trying to update using the gui up2date tool I got this error:
>  
>  
>  "Error while retrieving package kdebase-3.3.1-4.3.FC3.
>  The message was:
>  
>  An HTTP error occurred:
>  URL: 
>
> http://ftp.ussg.iu.edu/linux/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386//kdebase-3....
>  Status Code: 404
>  Error Message: Not Found" 
The RPM is not already fully on the mirror. Common situation for the
early update birds.

>  Karen 
Alexander


-- 
Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | new address - new key: 0xB366A773
legal statement: http://www.uni-x.org/legal.html
Fedora GNU/Linux Core 2 (Tettnang) on Athlon kernel 2.6.9-1.6_FC2smp 
Serendipity 04:10:02 up 5 days, 22:50, load average: 2.39, 1.62, 0.88

bittorrent powered UP2DATE

[scootgirl.com]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alexander Dalloz" <ad+lists(a)uni-x.org&gt;
To: "For users of Fedora Core releases" <fedora-list(a)redhat.com&gt;
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: bittorrent powered UP2DATE


Am Do, den 16.12.2004 schrieb scootgirl.com um 4:04:

Please don't hijack foreign threads by replying to other list mails
while starting a brand new topic. You mail is now an "answer" to "Re:
OpenSSL 0.9.7a seems to be vulnerable (was: Re: LKM Troja".
>  

No clue, it did that. Thanks for the heads up.

Karen
http://scootgirl.com/

bittorrent powered UP2DATE

[Sam Varshavchik]

scootgirl.com writes:

>  If it were possible, I'd be OK with getting updates via
> bittorrent, and like 
>  keeping that connection open for a while after each d/l. 
Bittorrent will not work well downloading relatively small files.  
Bittorrent is designed for downloading stuff that's hundreds of megabytes 
big, at least.

up2date files are too small for Bittorrent.