[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181016175742.0d898390@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 17:57:42 -0400
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@...rmont.com>
To: Hanno Böck <hanno@...eck.de>
Cc: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: ghostscript: 1Policy operator gives access to
.forceput CVE-2018-18284
On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 22:50:24 +0200 Hanno Böck <hanno@...eck.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 15:57:22 -0400
> "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@...rmont.com> wrote:
>
> > Again, given that PostScript is an archival format for a lot of
> > documents, wouldn't a version of ghostscript with all the ability
> > to do anything dangerous removed from the interpreter at compile
> > time be rational?
>
> I think nobody here will disagree with you that this would be good
> to have.
> The question is: Who's gonna do it? Will you?
Good question. One obstacle for me is a lack of familiarity with the
codebase (which others here seem to have), but on the other hand, I
appear to have more motivation.
Perry
--
Perry E. Metzger perry@...rmont.com
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.
