A hole in PaX
Posted Mar 17, 2005 13:34 UTC (Thu) by PaXTeam
Parent article: A hole in PaX
just some more info for the record.
1. technical details are here: https://www.immunitysec.com/pipermail/dailydave/2005-Marc...
2. the advisory has a typo, the correct year is 2002, so the bug was 2.5 years old.
3. for dang: you can't judge a person's maturity without knowing all the reasons for his decision, right? because it looks like you haven't bothered to read the advisory and therefore missed the "and other reasons" part.
4. i'm not sure what my 'harsh criticism' has to do with this bug, but if you're bothered by it, you should probably write an article on it and discuss the points i have made, they're relevant for all linux users after all (and i'll be happy to explain/prove my points again).
5. users won't be left completely unsupported (Brad and others have already offered their support), and on the practical side, the 2.2/2.4 patches will apply easily to future releases, while 2.6 won't be fit for any security relevant environment in the near future, so there's no actual loss there either.
to post comments)