Re: remote exploit?

[Ed Brown]

It wasn't about the vulnerability, which I'd still like to hear more
about.  

I didn't understand his comment to me, which referred to an anonymous
post about the solaris binary package 'blastwave', somewhat off-topic...

-Ed


On Tue, 2004-08-10 at 10:28, Phil D'Amore wrote:
> Anyone mind sharing the clarification with the rest of us?
> 
> Ed Brown wrote:
> 
> >Thanks for the clarification (offlist).  No, didn't know what blastwave
> >was till now.  And I'm not at all funny...
> >
> >-Ed
> >
> >
> >On Tue, 2004-08-10 at 10:02, Thomas Glanzmann wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Hi Ed,
> >>
> >>* Ed Brown <ebrown@lanl.gov> [040810 17:43]:
> >>    
> >>
> >>>I don't remember reading here about a remote/local root vulnerability in
> >>>2.0.0 through 2.1.7, that was fixed in the 2.1.8 release.  A full
> >>>description, with proof of concept exploit code, at:
> >>>http://www.coresecurity.com/common/showdoc.php?idx=387&idxseccion=10
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>are you the funny guy, who filed a bugreport against my blastwave
> >>package?
> >>
> >>    Thomas
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Help-cfengine mailing list
> >>Help-cfengine@gnu.org
> >>http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Help-cfengine mailing list
> >Help-cfengine@gnu.org
> >http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
> >  
> >