search for: explot

Thanks to all of you who support me in this topic. regards, iwan

...m/4.2/sparc/am-utils-6.0.1s11-1.4.2.sparc.rpm Source packages: ftp://updates.redhat.com/6.0/SRPMS/am-utils-6.0.1s11-1.6.0.src.rpm ftp://updates.redhat.com/5.2/SRPMS/am-utils-6.0.1s11-1.5.2.src.rpm ftp://updates.redhat.com/4.2/SRPMS/am-utils-6.0.1s11-1.4.2.src.rpm 7. Problem description: An explotable buffer overflow security problem in the amd daemon which is part of the am-utils package has been fixed. This problem is being actively exploted on the Internet and can be used to gain root access on machines running amd. Red Hat recommends anyone to upgrade to the fixed versions immediately....

...m/4.2/sparc/am-utils-6.0.1s11-1.4.2.sparc.rpm Source packages: ftp://updates.redhat.com/6.0/SRPMS/am-utils-6.0.1s11-1.6.0.src.rpm ftp://updates.redhat.com/5.2/SRPMS/am-utils-6.0.1s11-1.5.2.src.rpm ftp://updates.redhat.com/4.2/SRPMS/am-utils-6.0.1s11-1.4.2.src.rpm 7. Problem description: An explotable buffer overflow security problem in the amd daemon which is part of the am-utils package has been fixed. This problem is being actively exploted on the Internet and can be used to gain root access on machines running amd. Red Hat recommends anyone to upgrade to the fixed versions immediately....

...m here...) This will allow the owner to change the archive bits, but no-one else. I believe I've tested, albeit a while back, the "dos filemode" parameter too. IIRC, it would allow you to manually change the archive bits, by going and setting the properties directly - say via Windows Exploter. It wouldn't, however, allow for the applications, at least for those that I tested, to change the archive bits on files unless the user doing the modifications was also the owner. --- I have ways around this, by using "force user" for the whole share, but this really seems like a...

...given that mode i have an encoded buffer size of 6 bytes, then i guess there is some sort of padding for the remaining bits (5 bits) to complete the last byte. The same for other modes. Mode 3 is already alligned becouse it is exactly 160 bit --> 20 bytes. I wonder if that padding bits could be exploted in some way to send proprietary signaling codes. This in cases where bandwidth is very few. Bye. marzullo maio <marzullo63@yahoo.it> ha scritto: I would like to know if my vision of things is correct about frame structure. -------------------------------------------------------- Frame hea...

...86.rpm Alpha: ftp://updates.redhat.com/powertools/6.0/alpha/proftpd-1.2.0pre3-6.alpha.rpm Sparc: ftp://updates.redhat.com/powertools/6.0/sparc/proftpd-1.2.0pre3-6.sparc.rpm Source packages: ftp://updates.redhat.com/powertools/6.0/SRPMS/proftpd-1.2.0pre3-6.src.rpm 7. Problem description: An explotable buffer overflow security problem in the proftpd daemon has been fixed. The vulnerability is actively exploited on the Internet and site administrators are stronly advised to upgrade to the new packages. Thanks to the members of the BUGTRAQ mailing list and Nic Bellamy for providing a fix. 8....

Hi! If you were looking foe a paper about improving vorbis compression by using arithmetic coding and exploiting temporal redundancies (i.e. repeating sound) you might have a look here: http://web.interware.hu/rudas Three ogg vorbis files were compressed losslessly, with compression ratios between 2 - 8 % and compression time about 1/500 realtime (i.e. slow). Theoretical upper bound of the

I would like to know if my vision of things is correct about frame structure. -------------------------------------------------------- Frame header -------------------------------------------------------- Subframe1 header|Subframe1 content| -------------------------------------------------------- Subframe2 header|Subframe2 content| --------------------------------------------------------

...; archive/latest/18 X-Loop: redhat-watch-list@redhat.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: redhat-watch-list-request@redhat.com X-URL: http://www.redhat.com Potential security problems have been identified in all the procmail packages shipped with Red Hat Linux. Currently Red Hat is not aware of any explots built on these vulnerabilities. Red Hat would like to thank the members of the Bugtraq list for reporting these problems and the authors of procmail for quickly providing an update. Users of Red Hat Linux are recommended to upgrade to the new packages available under updates directory on our ftp...

Following Situation: Having an intranet-application that needs to know the ip-Address of the clients before running. Clients anywere in the Internet with any ip-address. So I thought about using masquerading the opposite way than normal. But then anybody could use this application. Dos anybody know how to make it a little bit more secure, like proofing the mac-address of the client, or something

...8980 Dec 5 1995 /usr/bin/traceroute > Leave this this way, otherwise it doesn''t work First reasonable comment > > >-rwsr-xr-x 1 root bin 31304 Jun 2 1996 /bin/mount > >-rwsr-xr-x 1 root bin 17168 Jun 2 1996 /bin/umount > Easily explotable. chmod 700. Incorrect. Install fixes. > >-rws--x--x 1 root root 54428 Oct 9 1996 /bin/diplogin > >-rws--x--x 1 root bin 54428 Aug 14 1996 /sbin/dip-3.3.7o > Dip has some bugs... chmod -s it. Install fixes. Alex --------------------------------...