Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Security Holes in CVS and Subversion Found

Posted by simoniker on from the nee-naw dept.

joe_bruin writes "News.com.com is reporting a two separate vulnerabilities that affect current versions of CVS and Subversion source control systems. Apparently, major users of these products (Linux and BSD distros, Samba, etc.) have been notified and have patched their systems." Update: 05/20 02:01 GMT by S : Clarification that there are separate issues for both CVS and Subversion.

15 of 250 comments (clear)

  1. First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    OMG I LOVE CHEESE!

  2. LOL OMG WTF BBQ FP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    That's teh suxor!!!

    Good thing only windbloze is vunerable...oh waiot doh!!!!! SUPAR DOH!!!!!!1111one

    1. Re:LOL OMG WTF BBQ FP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      This may be astupid comment but it certainly isn't offtopic so until a -1 I think this comment is stupid is created anyone who mods that down is modding incorrectly and should have mod priviledges removed lest they furthur ab use their power with improper modding technique.

  3. WTF??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    No comments? Unbelievable.

  4. First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Flames Suck

  5. Re:Just goes to show... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    99% of normal exploits or DOS attacks would be solved by using a language like Java, which AFAIK is the only language that automatically does bounds checking.
    Why more programs aren't written in it is beyond me.

  6. Re:Aren't all "First Post" posts Offtopic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    That post didn't say anything about being first post. In fact it wasdn't even first post.

  7. PR department you say? by Samah · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    As mentioned in a previous comment, perhaps there DOES need to be some kind of PR department for open source.
    Perhaps a group of dedicated OSS developers needs to form some kind of committee to produce non-biased articles re: open source, and pass those on to the media.
    Think about it - it could work, and if it was committee-based, unbiased views could be maintained.
    Factual (rather than MS-funded/manufactured) data could be used to generate anti-FUD articles which, if advertised/promoted correctly, could reveal to the public some of Microsoft's baseless attacks in the name of profit, and could sway the masses' views of OSS in general.

    --
    Homonyms are fun!
    You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
  8. Re:If CVS was implemented in Java... by t_allardyce · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Ironic how java the drink speeds you up where as java is so bloody slow.

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  9. Re:Aren't all "First Post" posts Offtopic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    FP is short for First Post...

  10. why you suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    yOU DumB ASS gET a FuCKInG cLUE (Score:0)
    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 19, @09:03PM (#9200710)
    Wi-fI iS dAnGeROUS tO yOUR coMPUter AND oThER LIVing THIngs.

    DON't yOU wAtCH dAteLine NBC? THey SAD wireLESS is SEcuRITy hAzzarD!!

    BAn ALL wi-FI and all LuNix because ThAT iS tHE REAL souRce OF thE worMs!

  11. Re:open source databases?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    TEH OPEN-SORCE DATABASS

    Mmm.... Data bass. DIPped in a light Beer batter and PAN-fried. Yum.

  12. Re:Unsurprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    What a torrent of verbal diarrhea. Most excellent work on the part of the mods.

  13. Re:uh oh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Modded Funny? Must be laughing at you rather than with you.

  14. Build errors by pauljlucas · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    I just grabbed the source for 1.12.8 and I get:
    ld: warning -L: directory name (no/lib) does not exist
    ld: warning multiple definitions of symbol _notify_check
    edit.o definition of _notify_check in section (__TEXT,__text)
    /usr/lib/libSystem.dylib(notify_c lient.o) definition of _notify_check
    ld: warning multiple definitions of symbol _regcomp
    ../lib/libcvs.a(regex.o) definition of _regcomp in section (__TEXT,__text)
    /usr/lib/libSystem.dylib(regcomp. So) definition of _regcomp
    ld: warning multiple definitions of symbol _regexec
    ../lib/libcvs.a(regex.o) definition of _regexec in section (__TEXT,__text)
    /usr/lib/libSystem.dylib(regexec. So) definition of _regexec
    ld: warning multiple definitions of symbol _regfree
    ../lib/libcvs.a(regex.o) definition of _regfree in section (__TEXT,__text)
    /usr/lib/libSystem.dylib(regfree. So) definition of _regfree
    ld: warning multiple definitions of symbol _regerror
    ../lib/libcvs.a(regex.o) definition of _regerror in section (__TEXT,__text)
    /usr/lib/libSystem.dylib(regerror .So) definition of _regerror
    I'm compiling on Mac OS X. Any ideas?
    --
    If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.