![]() |
2008-05-13
, 19:33
|
Posts: 5,335 |
Thanked: 8,187 times |
Joined on Mar 2007
@ Pennsylvania, USA
|
#2
|
![]() |
2008-05-13
, 20:17
|
|
Posts: 670 |
Thanked: 359 times |
Joined on May 2007
|
#3
|
The chinook openssl package seems to be from an earlier version (0.97e-4) than that (0.9.8c-1) affected by the bug (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux....announce/1614), but I'm not entirely sure, as I haven't seen the source. fnord.
![]() |
2008-05-13
, 20:19
|
Posts: 100 |
Thanked: 6 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
|
#4
|
![]() |
2008-05-13
, 20:54
|
|
Posts: 201 |
Thanked: 88 times |
Joined on Aug 2007
@ San Francisco, CA
|
#5
|
![]() |
2008-05-13
, 21:28
|
|
Posts: 670 |
Thanked: 359 times |
Joined on May 2007
|
#6
|
http://lists.debian.org/debian-secur.../msg00152.html
I thought my tablet would be effected as well, as the version of OpenSSH shipped is high enough to have been vulnerable, but when I ran its server keys through the ssh-vulnkey tool, they came out as okay. The public keys I replaced as a matter of course.
Is the IT version of OpenSSH not based on debian's?