Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 14:13:19 +0200
From: Sebastian Krahmer <>
To: Josh Bressers <>
Subject: Re: patch for remote buffer overflows and local message spoofing in mipv6 daemon

Its probably better to have two IDs, even though its unlikely
that they will be fixed separately. Its two issues at last.


On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 07:42:50AM -0400, Josh Bressers wrote:
> ----- "Sebastian Krahmer" <> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I tried this 2 years ago on vendor-sec and with the maintainers at that
> > time w/o success. I polished the patch to fit in the current commit.  The
> > bugs were not fixed during the two years.  Can someone assign CVE(s)?
> > 
> Do you need two IDs? This message sounds like it, but I'm not completely
> sure.
> Thanks.
> -- 
>     JB

~ perl
~ $_='print"\$_=\47$_\47;eval"';eval
~ - SuSE Security Team
~ SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.