Linux users beware too.....

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Whitecrest, Dec 2, 2003.

  1. Whitecrest

    Whitecrest Guest

    Bitching Kernel problem.

    ---------------------
    Researchers Find Serious Vulnerability in Linux Kernel
    By Dennis Fisher
    December 1, 2003

    Security professionals took note of a critical new vulnerability in the
    Linux kernel that could enable an attacker to gain root access to a
    vulnerable machine and take complete control of it. An unknown cracker
    recently used this weakness to compromise several of the Debian
    Project's servers, which led to the discovery of the new vulnerability.

    This discovery has broad implications for the Linux community. Because
    the flaw is in the Linux kernel itself, the problem affects virtually
    every distribution of the operating system and several vendors have
    confirmed that their products are vulnerable. The vulnerability is in
    all releases of the kernel from Version 2.4.0 through 2.5.69, but has
    been fixed in Releases 2.4.23-pre7 and 2.6.0-test6.

    -------------------------

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Dec 2, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Whitecrest wrote:

    > Bitching Kernel problem.


    It isn't that bad since:
    (a) The fix is already available
    (b) Its a local exploit so you need to find a way to execute a program on
    the box first

    Has Microsoft patched those five holes in IE that were announced last week
    yet?


    --
    David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/>
     
    David Dorward, Dec 2, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Whitecrest

    brucie Guest

    in post <news:bqj7tq$dh2$1$>
    David Dorward said:

    >> Bitching Kernel problem.


    > It isn't that bad since:
    > (a) The fix is already available
    > (b) Its a local exploit so you need to find a way to execute a program on
    > the box first
    >
    > Has Microsoft patched those five holes in IE that were announced last week
    > yet?


    don't get ahead of yourself. you have to wait for the ones discovered
    last year to be fixed first.

    --
    brucie
    03/December/2003 09:42:31 am kilo
     
    brucie, Dec 2, 2003
    #3
  4. Whitecrest

    Mark Parnell Guest

    Sometime around Tue, 02 Dec 2003 23:39:27 +0000, David Dorward is reported
    to have stated:

    > Whitecrest wrote:
    >
    >> Bitching Kernel problem.

    >
    > (b) Its a local exploit so you need to find a way to execute a program on
    > the box first


    How did someone manage to do that to the Debian servers then? Perhaps they
    need to pay more attention to offline security. :)

    --
    Mark Parnell
    http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
     
    Mark Parnell, Dec 3, 2003
    #4
  5. Whitecrest

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <bqj7tq$dh2$1$>,
    says...
    > > Bitching Kernel problem.

    > It isn't that bad since:
    > (a) The fix is already available
    > (b) Its a local exploit so you need to find a way to execute a program on
    > the box first


    > Has Microsoft patched those five holes in IE that were announced last week
    > yet?


    I don't understand your need to belittle Microsoft just because there is
    a post that shows a flaw in Linux.

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Dec 3, 2003
    #5
  6. Mark Parnell wrote:

    >> (b) Its a local exploit so you need to find a way to execute a program on
    >> the box first

    >
    > How did someone manage to do that to the Debian servers then?


    They managed to get hold of somebody's password, which gave them local
    access.


    --
    David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/>
     
    David Dorward, Dec 3, 2003
    #6
  7. Whitecrest wrote:
    > I don't understand your need to belittle Microsoft just because there is
    > a post that shows a flaw in Linux.


    and I don't see the need to make an offtopic post showing a flaw in Linux in
    the first place.

    --
    David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/>
     
    David Dorward, Dec 3, 2003
    #7
  8. Whitecrest wrote:
    > Bitching Kernel problem.
    >
    > ---------------------
    > Researchers Find Serious Vulnerability in Linux Kernel
    > By Dennis Fisher
    > December 1, 2003
    >
    > Security professionals took note of a critical new vulnerability in the
    > Linux kernel that could enable an attacker to gain root access to a
    > vulnerable machine and take complete control of it. An unknown cracker


    You're late, Whitecrest. This particular attack was reported over a week
    ago.


    Matthias
     
    Matthias Gutfeldt, Dec 3, 2003
    #8
  9. Whitecrest

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <bqk2ip$gf8$3$>,
    says...
    > > I don't understand your need to belittle Microsoft just because there is
    > > a post that shows a flaw in Linux.

    > and I don't see the need to make an offtopic post showing a flaw in Linux in
    > the first place.


    Oh so if I read about a security flaw in Microsoft Products it is ok to
    mention it in alt.html, but if there is a security problem in any other
    operating system then I should not mention it because we all know that
    Microsoft is really the only true evil....

    Very good David, I was not aware of these posting rules....

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Dec 3, 2003
    #9
  10. Whitecrest

    brucie Guest

    in post <news:>
    Whitecrest said:

    > Oh so if I read about a security flaw in Microsoft Products it is ok to
    > mention it in alt.html, but if there is a security problem in any other
    > operating system then I should not mention it because we all know that
    > Microsoft is really the only true evil....


    it really doesn't matter. linux sucks just as much as windows except for
    different reasons, probably more so, at least you know windows will
    support your hardware.

    --
    brucie
    03/December/2003 09:37:20 pm kilo
     
    brucie, Dec 3, 2003
    #10
  11. Whitecrest

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <bqki2a$2482n4$-berlin.de>, brucie01
    @bruciesusenetshit.info says...
    > > Oh so if I read about a security flaw in Microsoft Products it is ok to
    > > mention it in alt.html, but if there is a security problem in any other
    > > operating system then I should not mention it because we all know that
    > > Microsoft is really the only true evil....

    >
    > it really doesn't matter. linux sucks just as much as windows except for
    > different reasons, probably more so, at least you know windows will
    > support your hardware.


    There are problem in ALL OS's.

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Dec 3, 2003
    #11
  12. Michael Fesser, Dec 3, 2003
    #12
  13. Whitecrest wrote:

    > Oh so if I read about a security flaw in Microsoft Products it is ok to
    > mention it in alt.html,...


    .... well it counterbalances the thread starter :)

    How about we keep anti-OS sentiments out of alt.html (and keep it to cola
    etc where it belongs) except where it directly impacts something on topic?

    --
    David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/>
     
    David Dorward, Dec 3, 2003
    #13
  14. Whitecrest

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <bql9t0$e6e$2$>,
    says...
    > How about we keep anti-OS sentiments out of alt.html (and keep it to cola
    > etc where it belongs) except where it directly impacts something on topic?


    I agree, but the original post was not anti any OS, it was informing
    anyone using the OS there there is a serious issue with it, that they
    need to look at. That was on topic.

    Your reply, was not.

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Dec 3, 2003
    #14
  15. Whitecrest

    Isofarro Guest

    Whitecrest wrote:

    > In article <bql9t0$e6e$2$>,
    > says...
    >> How about we keep anti-OS sentiments out of alt.html (and keep it to cola
    >> etc where it belongs) except where it directly impacts something on
    >> topic?

    >
    > I agree, but the original post was not anti any OS, it was informing
    > anyone using the OS there there is a serious issue with it, that they
    > need to look at. That was on topic.
    >
    > Your reply, was not.


    What a load of complete nonsense.

    --
    Iso.
    FAQs: http://html-faq.com http://alt-html.org http://allmyfaqs.com/
    Recommended Hosting: http://www.affordablehost.com/
    Web Design Tutorial: http://www.sitepoint.com/article/1010
     
    Isofarro, Dec 3, 2003
    #15
  16. Whitecrest wrote:

    > I agree, but the original post was not anti any OS, it was informing
    > anyone using the OS there there is a serious issue with it, that they
    > need to look at. That was on topic.


    It might have been on topic if this was comp.os.linux, but it's not on
    topic in alt.html.

    Even browser security flaws are verging on off-topic.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132
     
    Toby A Inkster, Dec 3, 2003
    #16
  17. Toby A Inkster wrote:
    > ...
    > Even browser security flaws are verging on off-topic.


    It would be good to think so. Good luck with that one ;o)

    --
    William Tasso - http://WilliamTasso.com
     
    William Tasso, Dec 3, 2003
    #17
  18. Whitecrest

    Mark Parnell Guest

    Sometime around Wed, 03 Dec 2003 22:07:49 +0000, Toby A Inkster is reported
    to have stated:
    >
    > Even browser security flaws are verging on off-topic.


    If that's the case, then is a certain OS component off-topic, too? I can
    just see it:

    Newbie: This page doesn't display correctly in IE.
    Us: Sorry, that's off topic here...

    --
    Mark Parnell
    http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
     
    Mark Parnell, Dec 3, 2003
    #18
  19. Mark Parnell wrote:

    > Sometime around Wed, 03 Dec 2003 22:07:49 +0000, Toby A Inkster is reported
    > to have stated:
    >
    >> Even browser security flaws are verging on off-topic.

    >
    > If that's the case, then is a certain OS component off-topic, too? I can
    > just see it:
    >
    > Newbie: This page doesn't display correctly in IE.
    > Us: Sorry, that's off topic here...


    OK. How about "browser security flaws are off topic, unless they are
    triggered by HTML".

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132
     
    Toby A Inkster, Dec 3, 2003
    #19
  20. Whitecrest

    Mark Parnell Guest

    Sometime around Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:35:58 +0000, Toby A Inkster is reported
    to have stated:
    > Mark Parnell wrote:
    >> If that's the case, then is a certain OS component off-topic, too? I can
    >> just see it:
    >>
    >> Newbie: This page doesn't display correctly in IE.
    >> Us: Sorry, that's off topic here...

    >
    > OK. How about "browser security flaws are off topic, unless they are
    > triggered by HTML".


    LOL. I was just trying to demonstrate how pointless it is trying to define
    what is off-topic. Anyway, the FAQ says pretty much anything web-related is
    on topic.

    That still excludes the post that started this thread, of course. :)

    --
    Mark Parnell
    http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
     
    Mark Parnell, Dec 4, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. IAmIronMan

    Beware of scorpion53061(theft)

    IAmIronMan, Dec 24, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    387
    Bob Lehmann
    Dec 24, 2003
  2. hal
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,794
    =?Utf-8?B?SmVyZW15IERhdmlz?=
    Sep 13, 2004
  3. PW

    JKorpela BEWARE !!

    PW, Mar 4, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    484
    Chris Morris
    Mar 5, 2004
  4. Anonymous

    BEWARE OF GODADDY--EXTORTION

    Anonymous, May 26, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    481
    Augustus
    May 26, 2004
  5. Philip Smith

    Beware complexity

    Philip Smith, Mar 13, 2005, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    323
Loading...

Share This Page