Slashdot Mirror


Apache 1.3.26 and 2.0.39 Released

cliffwoolley writes "The Apache Software Foundation has released new versions of both Apache 1.3 and 2.0. These versions are both security and bug-fix releases. They address and fix the issues noted in CAN-2002-0392 [CERT VU#944335] regarding a vulnerability in the handling of chunked transfer encoding. You can download the new releases here." This of course is for the exploit that we reported yesterday. It is hard to complain about a 24-hour response time for a bug.

9 of 138 comments (clear)

  1. 24 is nice... by jeffy124 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... but it certainly would've been better if ISS had allowed it, or even writeup a proper patch or give the right info on who's vulnerable.

    Personally, their argument about not contacting the Apache Foundation because some of them work for Red Hat is complete bullshit, plus the fact that they could've contacted CERT about it instead. CERT would've made sure RH didnt take credit, since that's among ISS's fears, and also would've told them that the issue was known and being worked on.

    --
    The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
  2. Complaints Timescale by 4of12 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is hard to complain about a 24-hour response time for a bug.

    No, it's not:)

    Seriously, though, it's a pretty impressive turn around time and should give some credence to those of us making arguments that the support is really there for open source projects like Apache, even though there's no "1-800-HELPME" number nor an expensive maintenance and support agreement.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
    1. Re:Complaints Timescale by 4of12 · · Score: 5, Funny

      just type it in a search engine...

      What are you asking, man! I'd have to learn how to read, write and think to do that.

      Can't I just get a warm fuzzy feeling by buying a large support agreement from Microsoft?

      Besides, I'll be among a large herd of IIS users - who could possibly know and want to `sploit me with Code Red?

      Most buyers at my site are using fradulent credit card numbers anyway, so if the database gets owned it's not all that big a deal.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
  3. 24 Hour Response Time by PeekabooCaribou · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is hard to complain about a 24-hour response time for a bug.

    I think this is the real advantage of OSS. It's people that make Apache, not some group of nameless programmers in a high-rise somewhere. The Apache programmers use Apache on a daily basis, so they stand to gain just as much as the rest of us do by releasing a quick fix. I honestly think they care about making it a good, bug-free product. I put much more trust into the open-source projects than I do for any closed source commercial package.

    --
    "I'll say it again for the logic-impaired." -- Larry Wall.
  4. Folks at ISS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful


    ISS is full of shit. They have no respect for the way things work. Due to being connected with the security team of my company, I knew about the bug for a few days. And also that the Apache group was working to correct it. But not, the pricks at ISS had to release it with a whopping two hour notice, not only that but they released a broken patch.

    And on top of all of that their stock goes up. What a crock of shit.
    </rant>

  5. Re:mod_ssl? by jonabbey · · Score: 5, Informative

    mod_ssl is baked into the Apache releases 2.0.35 and later, and is _far_ easier to compile and install than the old Apache 1.3 + external mod_ssl was.

    Get to Apache 2.0.x when you can.

  6. See, I told you so. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Need I point out my earlier comment? I'll save you the trouble of looking it up:

    I have to say, the Apache web server is quite a high quality piece of work. The fact that an obscure security issue has been found is a good sign that developers and users are on top of things in the constant struggle against remote exploiters.
    I am confident that a fix will be available very shortly. Serious sysadmins will have their servers patched sooner than any serious damage takes place. I don't have the same confidence when it comes to Microsoft's products.

    I believe it was Dark Helmet who once said, "Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." But in the case of software, it's pretty clear that free will always triumph because commercial is dumb. Honestly, software developed out of a desire to:

    • Learn,
    • Do good,
    • Have fun in the process...

    is simply going to be better software than something that's developed out of the runaway greed rampant in the inferior competition.

  7. FUD by Vainglorious+Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    This of course is for the exploit that we reported yesterday

    Um, surely you mean vulnerability ?

    --
    My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
  8. Re:24 Hours - unreasonable and dangerous by buffy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Givng Apache 24 hours to make a bug fix imposed an unreasonable deadline, and also encouraged the fix to be quick and dirty. Any time code is patched, it could cause other bugs to show, or introduce new ones. Developers need a certain amount of time to do testing once changes are made to make sure they didn't break anything! Kudos to the apache developers for meeting the deadline, but anti-kudos to (i'm not sure who) those imposed it.

    You kind-of missed how this went down. Nobody "imposed" a 24-hour window for the bug to be fixed. Had IIS not been a bunch of boneheads and prematurely (as in ejaculation) released information regarding the vulnerability, the programmers involved could've taken a little bit more time to develop the fix, ensuring better quality.

    The commendations re: the 24-hour turn around is simply referencing the ability of a lose-knit group of open source programmers to rapidly respond to a bad situation. Had Microsoft been in the same spot (they have been before--people have screwed them, too--and they most certainly will be again) it still would've taken them a lot longer to kick out the fix, and even longer to get it into their distribution channels.