From: | Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: @(#) Mordred Labs advisory 0x0001: Buffer overflow in |
Date: | 2002-08-20 03:40:22 |
Message-ID: | 3D61BA26.D97FBE91@postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> > Hang on, you seem to be suggesting we release a major new upgrade, with
> > major new functionality, knowing it contains a way to trivially crash
> > the backend.
>
> This particular hole has been in *every* release since Postgres 1.01.
How many releases have we known about this and still done a major
release?
> I'm really not interested in responding to any argument that we cannot
> release 7.3 until we have fixed everything that could be labeled a DOS
> threat. 7.3 already contains a bunch of bug fixes; shall we postpone
> releasing those because there are other unfixed bugs?
How trivial are they to exploit?
For example, thinking about something like the various ISP's around who
host PostgreSQL databases; how much effort would it take to fix the
vulnerabilities that let someone with remote access, but no ability to
run a "trusted" language, take out the backend?
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
> regards, tom lane
--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-08-20 03:47:30 | Re: @(#) Mordred Labs advisory 0x0001: Buffer overflow in |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-08-20 03:27:43 | Re: @(#) Mordred Labs advisory 0x0001: Buffer overflow in |