similar to: Where to find OpenSSH patch for CVE-2020-14145

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 100 matches similar to: "Where to find OpenSSH patch for CVE-2020-14145"

2020 Oct 30
0
Where to find OpenSSH patch for CVE-2020-14145
Hello, We are currently trying to apply a patch to our 8.0p1 version of OpenSSH for CVE-2020-14145<https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-14145>. The "patch" tag from NIST's web page links to the 8.3p1 vs 8.4p1 comparison<https://github.com/openssh/openssh-portable/compare/V_8_3_P1...V_8_4_P1> on GitHub. Is there, however, any one specific patch, which could be
2020 Jan 04
2
[EXTERNAL] Re: Delete Phabricator metadata tags before committing
The limitation with the "Reviewed by" line is that if you just use `arc` it indicates who was added as reviewer on the revision, but not who approved it. Because of this, I am wary of relying on this line for anything. If you want to know who reviewed a change, better click on the Differential Revision link and go to the source of truth. -- Mehdi On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:44 AM
2020 Jan 06
2
[EXTERNAL] Re: Delete Phabricator metadata tags before committing
I'm sure I've seen many commits with both "Reviewed by:" and "Reviewers:" tags, which look to have been done with arc (though I can't be sure). How were those generated? On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 at 19:12, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I tend to prune it down myself - and if the list has only one name > on it, it's usually a pretty
2020 Jan 02
3
Delete Phabricator metadata tags before committing
I also find the "Reviewed by" tag useful (as well as the review link), for the same reasons. In fact, I don't even use arcanist to push commits, so I do it all by hand, and only include the "Reviewed by" and "Differential Revision" tags. On Fri, 27 Dec 2019 at 20:55, David Blaikie via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I don't think
2019 Oct 25
4
unnecessary reload of 8-byte struct on i386
Hello folks, I've recently been looking at the generated code for a few functions in Chromium while investigating crashes, and I came across a curious pattern. A smallish repro case is available at https://godbolt.org/z/Dsu1WI . In that case, the function Assembler::emit_arith receives a struct (Operand) by value and passes it by value to another function. That struct is 8 bytes long, so the
2020 Apr 01
2
[RFC] [Windows SEH] Local_Unwind (Jumping out of a _finally) and -EHa (Hardware Exception Handling)
Resending; I accidentally dropped llvm-dev. -Eli From: Eli Friedman Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 1:01 PM To: Ten Tzen <tentzen at microsoft.com> Cc: aaron.smith at microsoft.com Subject: RE: [EXT] [llvm-dev] [RFC] [Windows SEH] Local_Unwind (Jumping out of a _finally) and -EHa (Hardware Exception Handling) This looks like it outlines the implementation pretty well. For goto in finally,
2020 May 03
2
[RFC] [Windows SEH] Local_Unwind (Jumping out of a _finally)
Hi, Per Reid’s feedback, I have separated two SEH missing features. This thread now is only focusing on _local_unwind(), Jumping out of _finally. The design is documented in Wiki here: https://github.com/tentzen/llvm-project/wiki/Windows-SEH:-Local_Unwind-(aka:-Jumping-Out-of-_Finally) The implementation can be seen here:
2020 Apr 02
2
[RFC] [Windows SEH] Local_Unwind (Jumping out of a _finally) and -EHa (Hardware Exception Handling)
Reply inline From: Ten Tzen <tentzen at microsoft.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 3:54 PM To: Eli Friedman <efriedma at quicinc.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Cc: aaron.smith at microsoft.com Subject: [EXT] RE: [llvm-dev] [RFC] [Windows SEH] Local_Unwind (Jumping out of a _finally) and -EHa (Hardware Exception Handling) ? For goto in finally, why are you
2006 Mar 16
4
Domain Authentication Problem
I have been running Samba 2.2.8 on a Solaris 8 server with a valid NetBIOS server name on the AD domain. The Samba 2.2.8 configuration was configured for security = domain. Everything was fine until the AD domain controllers were "upgraded" to Windows Server 2003 SP1. User authentication would no longer function with the following error message in the samba 2.2.8 log:
2020 Apr 16
2
[RFC] [Windows SEH][-EHa] Support Hardware Exception Handling
Hi, Eli, Why are you under the impression that threw_exception() will not be called if optimizations are enabled? I don’t know if the -EHa Spec is clearly described in MSFT Webs. At least this proposal has described the rules for both C & C++ code. The very first rule clearly said that “no exception can move in or out of _try region., i.e., no potential faulty instruction can be moved
2020 Apr 15
2
[RFC] [Windows SEH][-EHa] Support Hardware Exception Handling
Hi, This is a spin-off of previous Windows SEH RFC below. This RFC only focus on supporting HW Exception Handling. A detailed implementation can be seen in here: https://github.com/tentzen/llvm-project/commit/8a2421c274b683051e456cbe12c177e3b934fb5e It passes all MSVC SEH suite (excluding those with “Jumping out of _finally” ( _Local_Unwind)). Thanks, --Ten **** The rules for C code: ****
2020 Apr 01
2
[RFC] [Windows SEH] Local_Unwind (Jumping out of a _finally) and -EHa (Hardware Exception Handling)
Hi, all, The intend of this thread is to complete the support for Windows SEH. Currently there are two major missing features: Jumping out of a _finally and Hardware exception handling. The document below is my proposed design and implementation to fully support SEH on LLVM. I have completely implemented this design on a branch in repo:
2020 Apr 16
2
[RFC] [Windows SEH][-EHa] Support Hardware Exception Handling
As stated in the design paragraph, this design does not intend to model precise CFG at instruction level since it’s complicated and unnecessary. As long as we comply C and C++ rules listed below, we achieve -EHa semantic. There is NO need to precisely model HW exception control flow at instruction-level. Your example about memcpy() is just a bug in current implementation. I will fix it so that
2020 Apr 02
2
[RFC] [Windows SEH] Local_Unwind (Jumping out of a _finally) and -EHa (Hardware Exception Handling)
* When a goto in a _finally occurs, we must "unwind" to the target code, not just "jump" to target label I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. In the Microsoft ABI, goto out of a catch block also calls into the unwinder. We have to run any destructors, and return from the funclet (catchret/cleanupret). * The call inside a _try is an invoke with EH
2024 Feb 29
2
[External] converting MATLAB -> R | element-wise operation
I decided to do a direct comparison of transpose and sweep. library(microbenchmark) NN <- matrix(c(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), nrow = 2, byrow = TRUE) # Example matrix lambda <- c(2, 3, 4) # Example vector colNN <- t(NN) microbenchmark( sweep = sweep(NN, 2, lambda, "/"), transpose = t(t(NN)/lambda), colNN = colNN/lambda ) Unit: nanoseconds expr min lq
2009 Dec 15
2
apparently incorrect p-values from 2-sided Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (PR#14145)
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --1132542651-1468968864-1260896436=:8788 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII I am using R version 2.6.2 (2008-02-08) on a Ubuntu Linux system. I seemed to be finding occasional errors in the p-values produced by ks.test(a,b)
2019 Nov 14
7
RFC: token arguments and operand bundles
Hello everyone, I've just uploaded a patch (https://reviews.llvm.org/D70261) to introduce a could of new token types to be used with constrained floating point intrinsics and, optionally, vector predicated intrinsics. These intrinsics may not be of interest to many of you, but I have a more general question. I would like some general feedback on the way I am proposing to use token arguments
2023 Mar 08
5
[Bug 3547] New: sftp crash with 'invalid multibyte character' when pressing Tab to complete specific Chinese filenames
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3547 Bug ID: 3547 Summary: sftp crash with 'invalid multibyte character' when pressing Tab to complete specific Chinese filenames Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 8.4p1 Hardware: amd64 OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: trivial
2020 Sep 20
13
Call for testing: OpenSSH 8.4
Hi, OpenSSH 8.4p1 is almost ready for release, so we would appreciate testing on as many platforms and systems as possible. This is a bugfix release. Snapshot releases for portable OpenSSH are available from http://www.mindrot.org/openssh_snap/ The OpenBSD version is available in CVS HEAD: http://www.openbsd.org/anoncvs.html Portable OpenSSH is also available via git using the instructions at
2020 Sep 20
2
Call for testing: OpenSSH 8.4
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 03:13:28PM -0400, Randall S. Becker wrote: > On September 20, 2020 2:02 AM, Damien Miller wrote: > > OpenSSH 8.4p1 is almost ready for release, so we would appreciate testing > > on as many platforms and systems as possible. This is a bugfix release. > > I will be testing this shortly on HPE NonStop platforms. > > Side question: We now have