similar to: Package hwloc-1.5-2.el6_5.x86_64.rpm is not signed

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2014:1048 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2014-1048.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: a78248940b097ea5231b2c9fa1d5c9697365a869432b392daa4158eb93d5a380 hwloc-1.5-2.el6_5.i686.rpm 1e345b4d6d7bfb257e98cdbbb5f1ebb378fb394299daadf8635c7447e92c4f08

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2014:1272 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2014-1272.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: cd30f512c5c8d98168738e169952f561054fe73633df74ac03cf1b7426a3d2bb hwloc-1.5-3.el6_5.i686.rpm 3f38e1172416d48393739ea54cbe8cd46e917f994eca739a3a939ff8d1e302e7

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce at centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request at centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner at centos.org When

Hello, gpk-update-viewer on my CentOS 6 desktop gives me an error about untrusted updates. When running yum update from a terminal I get the following error: Package chkconfig-1.3.49.3-2.el6_4.1.x86_64.rpm is not signed No other packages seem to be affected so for now I updated excuding chkconfig and ntsysv. Regards, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research

Hi, Updating selinux-policy-targeted to 3.7.19-260 fails. The archive seems corrupt. Got another copy from http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/ which also fails: # rpm -Fv selinux-policy-targeted-3.7.19-260.el6.noarch.rpm Preparing packages for installation... selinux-policy-targeted-3.7.19-260.el6 warning: /etc/selinux/targeted/contexts/customizable_types saved as

Hello team, Just wondering how the build of 5.10 is coming along. Is there a resource that informs us on these matters? Thanks! Regards, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research

Hello John, On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 16:33 +0000, John Hodrien wrote: > On Thu, 9 Feb 2017, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > > > How about my request for checksums in the git repo? > > What checksums would you actually want in git? SRPMS are signed which allows the integrity of the contents to be checked. Such an integrity check is missing from the git repo. Either a checksum

Hi, Just noticed that the distro tag used in openssl is different from upstream. Upstream and the last update (openssl-1.0.1e-30.el6_6.7) use "el6_6" where as the latest update (openssl-1.0.1e-30.el6.8) uses "el_6". Any reason for this discrepancy? Regards, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce at centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request at centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner at centos.org When

Hi, I woke up Saturday morning unable to boot my freshly upgraded 5.6 with grub hanging at "GRUB". After getting the boot loader fixed I experienced crashes in evolution. Downgrading glibc to 2.5-58 seems to fix these issues. Anyone else seeing this? Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research

Hi, Reading http://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30939&forum=37 I noticed a warning about an upcoming bugged update xorg-x11-server-utils-7.1-5.el5_6.1 I would advise everyone to add exclude=xorg-x11-server-utils-7.1-5.el5_6.1 to their updates repo config. Regards, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research

Hello Johnny, On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 09:47 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote: > 2. They already have shell access on the machine in question and they > can already run anything in that shell that they can run via what you > are pointing out. No, assuming noexec /home mounts all they can run is system binaries. > 3. If they have access to a zeroday issue that give them root .. they >

On Thu, 2017-02-02 at 06:40 -0800, John R Pierce wrote: > On 2/2/2017 6:22 AM, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > > However, the fact that the binary in the example is setuid is orthogonal > > to the fact that heap spraying is a very serious attack vector. > > without privilege escalation, what does it attack ? pkcheck might not be directly vulnerable. However, pkexec is.

Hello Jonathan, On Wed, 2016-12-14 at 15:03 -0500, Jonathan Billings wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 07:29:19PM +0100, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > > > get_sources.sh > > > > The name suggests this is what we need (or do we??) If only I could find > > that script anywhere... > > Johnny said it at the beginning of his email. I'll paste it again so

On Thu, 2017-02-02 at 13:40 -0800, Gordon Messmer wrote: > Escalation *requires* attacking a program in a security context other > than your own. Not necessarily. Suppose the adversary is aware of a root exploit/privilege escalation in a random library. Then the heap spraying allows this attacker to easily trigger this exploit because he is able to initialize the entire contents of the

Hi, Anyone else seeing this? C7 Gnome Desktop, opened a gnome-terminal, click File -> New Profile and gnome-terminal-server gets killed. Regards, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research

Hello list, To my astonishment the openssh versions on both C6 and C7 will by default negotiate an MD5 HMAC. C6 client, C7 server: debug2: mac_setup: found hmac-md5 debug1: kex: server->client aes128-ctr hmac-md5 none debug2: mac_setup: found hmac-md5 debug1: kex: client->server aes128-ctr hmac-md5 none C7 client & server: debug2: mac_setup: setup hmac-md5-etm at openssh.com debug1:

Hello, On Thu, 2015-04-02 at 14:25 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 04/02/2015 11:45 AM, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > > Just noticed that the distro tag used in openssl is different from > > upstream. Upstream and the last update (openssl-1.0.1e-30.el6_6.7) use > > "el6_6" where as the latest update (openssl-1.0.1e-30.el6.8) uses > > "el_6". Any

Hi, The fact that apparently the last tigervnc update from upstream was missed triggered me to check for missing updates and packages in 6.3. Here are my results. Sorry for any false positives that might have crept in, but note that some of the 6_x updates actually are updates and not a parsing error. And perhaps an occasional false positive due to having to compare upstream SRPMS vs downstream

Hi, On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 11:25 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote: > === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === > SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED That's the line you are looking for. Since your disk apparently does not store an error log - not sure if that's something with SSDs in general or just with this particular disk - you will always have to invoke