Koozali.org: home of the SME Server

Legacy Forums => Experienced User Forum => Topic started by: wellsi on September 24, 2005, 12:09:01 AM

Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: wellsi on September 24, 2005, 12:09:01 AM
The maintenance team would like to announce that the following packages are available from the updates repositories for SME 6.0 & 6.0.1. These updates can also be applied to 6.5RC1.


To update your server see http://no.longer.valid/phpwiki/index.php/How%20to%20update%20SME%20Server
To help this process see http://no.longer.valid/phpwiki/index.php/Maintenance%20Process


libtool-libs-1.4.2-13.legacy.i386.rpm
   FL Note: http://www.fedoralegacy.org/updates/RH7.3/2004-05-18-FLSA_2004_1268__Updated_libtool_resolves_security_vulnerability.html
   FL Bug : https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1268
   
   The chmod utility has a race (that access to the temporary directory could
   be gained after it is created but before it is chmoded)

apache-1.3.27-8.legacy.i386.rpm
   FL Note: http://www.fedoralegacy.org/updates/RH7.3/2005-08-10-FLSA_2005_157701__Updated_Apache_httpd_packages_fix_security_issues.html
   FL Bug : https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157701

   Watchfire reported a flaw that occured when using the Apache server as
   an HTTP proxy. A remote attacker could send an HTTP request with both a
   "Transfer-Encoding: chunked" header and a "Content-Length" header. This
   caused Apache to incorrectly handle and forward the body of the request
   in a way that the receiving server processes it as a separate HTTP
   request. This could allow the bypass of Web application firewall
   protection or lead to cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks. The Common
   Vulnerabilities and Exposures project (cve.mitre.org) assigned the name
   CAN-2005-2088 to this issue.

   A buffer overflow was discovered in htdigest that may allow an attacker
   to execute arbitrary code. Since htdigest is usually only accessible
   locally, the impact of this issue is low. The Common Vulnerabilities and
   Exposures project (cve.mitre.org) assigned the name CAN-2005-1344 to
   this issue.

   Marc Stern reported an off-by-one overflow in the mod_ssl CRL
   verification callback. In order to exploit this issue the Apache server
   would need to be configured to use a malicious certificate revocation
   list (CRL). The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures project
   (cve.mitre.org) assigned the name CAN-2005-1268 to this issue.

   Users of Apache httpd should update to these errata packages that
   contain backported patches to correct these issues.

gzip-1.3.3-1.2.legacy.i386.rpm
   FL Note: http://www.fedoralegacy.org/updates/RH7.3/2005-08-10-FLSA_2005_157696__Updated_gzip_package_fixes_security_issues.html
   FL Bug : https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157696

   A bug was found in the way zgrep processes file names. If a user can be
   tricked into running zgrep on a file with a carefully crafted file name,
   arbitrary commands could be executed as the user running zgrep. The
   Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures project (cve.mitre.org) has
   assigned the name CAN-2005-0758 to this issue.

   A bug was found in the way gunzip modifies permissions of files being
   decompressed. A local attacker with write permissions in the directory
   in which a victim is decompressing a file could remove the file being
   written and replace it with a hard link to a different file owned by the
   victim, gunzip then gives the linked file the permissions of the
   uncompressed file. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures project
   (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the name CAN-2005-0988 to this issue.

   A directory traversal bug was found in the way gunzip processes the -N
   flag. If a victim decompresses a file with the -N flag, gunzip fails to
   sanitize the path which could result in a file owned by the victim being
   overwritten. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures project
   (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the name CAN-2005-1228 to this issue.

   Users of gzip should upgrade to this updated package, which contains
   backported patches to correct these issues.

mc-4.5.55-12.legacy.i386.rpm
   FL Note: http://www.fedoralegacy.org/updates/RH7.3/2005-08-10-FLSA_2005_152889__Updated_mc_packages_fix_security_issues.html
   FL Bug : https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=152889

   Several buffer overflows, several temporary file creation
   vulnerabilities, and one format string vulnerability have been
   discovered in Midnight Commander. These vulnerabilities were discovered
   mostly by Andrew V. Samoilov and Pavel Roskin. The Common
   Vulnerabilities and Exposures project (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the
   names CAN-2004-0226, CAN-2004-0231, and CAN-2004-0232 to these issues.

   Shell escape bugs have been discovered in several of the mc vfs backend
   scripts. An attacker who is able to influence a victim to open a
   specially-crafted URI using mc could execute arbitrary commands as the
   victim. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures project (cve.mitre.org)
   has assigned the name CAN-2004-0494 to this issue.

   Several format string bugs were found in Midnight Commander. If a user
   is tricked by an attacker into opening a specially crafted path with mc,
   it may be possible to execute arbitrary code as the user running
   Midnight Commander. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures project
   (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the name CAN-2004-1004 to this issue.

   Several buffer overflow bugs were found in Midnight Commander. If a user
   is tricked by an attacker into opening a specially crafted file or path
   with mc, it may be possible to execute arbitrary code as the user
   running Midnight Commander. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures
   project (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the name CAN-2004-1005 to this
   issue.

   Several denial of service bugs were found in Midnight Commander. These
   bugs could cause Midnight Commander to hang or crash if a victim opens a
   carefully crafted file. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures project
   (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the names CAN-2004-1009, CAN-2004-1090,
   CAN-2004-1091, CAN-2004-1092, CAN-2004-1093 and CAN-2004-1174 to these
   issues.

   A filename quoting bug was found in Midnight Commander's FISH protocol
   handler. If a victim connects via embedded SSH support to a host
   containing a carefully crafted filename, arbitrary code may be executed
   as the user running Midnight Commander. The Common Vulnerabilities and
   Exposures project (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the name CAN-2004-1175 to
   this issue.

   A buffer underflow bug was found in Midnight Commander. If a malicious
   local user is able to modify the extfs.ini file, it could be possible to
   execute arbitrary code as a user running Midnight Commander. The Common
   Vulnerabilities and Exposures project (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the
   name CAN-2004-1176 to this issue.

   A buffer overflow bug was found in the way Midnight Commander handles
   directory completion. If a victim uses completion on a maliciously
   crafted directory path, it is possible for arbitrary code to be executed
   as the user running Midnight Commander. The Common Vulnerabilities and
   Exposures project (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the name CAN-2005-0763 to
   this issue.

   Users of mc are advised to upgrade to these packages, which contain
   backported security patches to correct these issues.
Title: Is it really necessary to do /sbin/e-smith/signal-event post
Post by: torrestech on September 24, 2005, 03:36:35 AM
Hi i was just looking at the yum updates.
It seems that a lot of these updates are fairly standard  redhat packages. Is it really necessary to do # /sbin/e-smith/signal-event post-upgrade
# /sbin/e-smith/signal-event reboot
Or is this only with certian packages.
Kust that i do not like to reboot more often than i have to.
Adam
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: wellsi on September 24, 2005, 11:49:30 AM
It is always safest to do the full sequence.

In the case of these four updates it is essential that apache is restarted for the update to take effect. This need not be a full re-boot.
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: boss_hog on September 29, 2005, 07:08:57 PM
Hey Yall,
to anyone else running an SME6.5rc1 box,
here is some input.
My production box web server, web mail, basic file server,
lightly modified with add-on contribs.

I went into the /etc/yum.conf file and made changes to
 the directories(there isn't a functioning .../6.5RC1/updates/ dir on the mirror, YET!)
The changes to the yum.conf, make the yum updater look in the .../6.0.1/updates/ dir on the mirror.

The update appears to have went fine, server is up and running! Your mileage may vary!

Hope this helps.
Joe
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: mrjhb3 on September 29, 2005, 07:30:56 PM
Quote from: "boss_hog"
Hey Yall,
to anyone else running an SME6.5rc1 box,
here is some input.
My production box web server, web mail, basic file server,
lightly modified with add-on contribs.

I went into the /etc/yum.conf file and made changes to
 the directories(there isn't a functioning .../6.5RC1/updates/ dir on the mirror, YET!)
The changes to the yum.conf, make the yum updater look in the .../6.0.1/updates/ dir on the mirror.

The update appears to have went fine, server is up and running! Your mileage may vary!

Hope this helps.
Joe


Yes, you are correct, that is the same thing I currently do.  You should have downloaded 18 updates.  The maintenance team is currently working on getting the 6.5 support in place.  Hopefully we will have an announcement out on that shortly.

JB
Title: Missing Files
Post by: ltc6netspec on October 04, 2005, 08:01:59 PM
I have gone into the updates folder and there isn't any files in there. So where is YUM suppose to get the updates for 6.0-1
Title: Re: Missing Files
Post by: mrjhb3 on October 04, 2005, 08:22:44 PM
Quote from: "ltc6netspec"
I have gone into the updates folder and there isn't any files in there. So where is YUM suppose to get the updates for 6.0-1


Yeah, the directory structure is changing.  Possibly a symlink needs to be put in place during the transition.  The updates are now currently in the updates-common directory.

http://mirror.contribs.org/smeserver/releases/6.0.1/updates-common/i386/

You will have to manually change your yum.conf until the new one is released.  I'll send a note to the maintenance team so that all are aware of this issue.

JB
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: ltc6netspec on October 04, 2005, 08:53:39 PM
Thanks for the reply :)
Title: Re: Missing Files
Post by: Denbert on October 04, 2005, 09:21:52 PM
Quote from: "mrjhb3"


Yeah, the directory structure is changing.  Possibly a symlink needs to be put in place during the transition.  The updates are now currently in the updates-common directory.

http://mirror.contribs.org/smeserver/releases/6.0.1/updates-common/i386/

You will have to manually change your yum.conf until the new one is released.  I'll send a note to the maintenance team so that all are aware of this issue.

JB


Hi,

Just to be shure 

I’ll change my /etc/yum.conf to the following:

[updates]
name=SME Server $releasever updates
baseurl=http://mirror.contribs.org/smeserver/releases/$releasever/updates-common/i386/
gpgcheck=0

If yes, I have another failure, as there are NO updates
Title: Re: Missing Files
Post by: mrjhb3 on October 04, 2005, 09:51:04 PM
Quote from: "Denbert"
Quote from: "mrjhb3"


Yeah, the directory structure is changing.  Possibly a symlink needs to be put in place during the transition.  The updates are now currently in the updates-common directory.

http://mirror.contribs.org/smeserver/releases/6.0.1/updates-common/i386/

You will have to manually change your yum.conf until the new one is released.  I'll send a note to the maintenance team so that all are aware of this issue.

JB


Hi,

Just to be shure 

I’ll change my /etc/yum.conf to the following:

[updates]
name=SME Server $releasever updates
baseurl=http://mirror.contribs.org/smeserver/releases/$releasever/updates-common/i386/
gpgcheck=0

If yes, I have another failure, as there are NO updates


You didn't say what version you are using.  You should be able to verify the files as well.

http://mirror.contribs.org/smeserver/releases/6.0/updates-common/i386/

http://mirror.contribs.org/smeserver/releases/6.0.1/updates-common/i386/

http://mirror.contribs.org/smeserver/releases/6.5RC1/updates-common/i386/

Caveat, I haven't yet myself tried to update a server with the new locations.  Someone else did, however.  I'll get around to this in the next couple of days.

Or, you can go to one of those directories and manually download and install the latest yum RPM which has the changes to the new directory structure.

Worse case, you will have to manually download the updates until someone can look into whether this is an issue or now.  Not, the best solution, but it will work in the short-term.

JB
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: icyseas on October 07, 2005, 05:54:10 PM
Firstly, a hearty thanks to those putting up the updates.

A question:
I have seen that there are more updates available in the 'updates-testing-common' repositories.

How do we know how important it is to include these updates? Are the 'updates-common' the security patches, and the 'updates-testing-common' patches for system bug-squashing?
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: mrjhb3 on October 07, 2005, 06:08:07 PM
Quote from: "icyseas"
Firstly, a hearty thanks to those putting up the updates.

A question:
I have seen that there are more updates available in the 'updates-testing-common' repositories.

How do we know how important it is to include these updates? Are the 'updates-common' the security patches, and the 'updates-testing-common' patches for system bug-squashing?


Yes, and yes.

I'll try to explain this a little more.  The updates-common area are for updates that can apply to 6.0, 6.0.1, and 6.5RC1.  The same applies for the updates-testing-common.  updates-common should be ready for primetime and updates-testing-common for testing before being moved to updates-common.  I'll try to draft a e-mail to send to the list that explains this as well.

JB
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: Normando on October 12, 2005, 01:55:57 AM
About MC update, why not use
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/utils/file/managers/mc/binaries/RedHat/7.x/mc-4.6.0-2.i386.rpm
?
This is sugest http://www.ibiblio.org/mc/ page
I have installed and run perfect. And has a lot of syntax highlighting.
I don't know if 4.6.0 has security bugs, but run ok.

Normando
Title: Error with 6.0.1 and YUM update.
Post by: william_syd on October 17, 2005, 09:19:42 AM
I must be doing something wrong. I get the following output from YUM..

Code: [Select]
Welcome to SME Server 6.0.1-01
[root@teddy root]# cd yum
[root@teddy yum]# yum update
Gathering package information from servers
Getting headers from: SME Server 6.x base updates
Getting headers from: SME Server 6.0.1 os
Getting headers from: SME Server 6.0.1 updates
Finding updated packages
Downloading needed headers
Resolving dependencies
....identical dependency loop exceeded
package libtool needs pam = 1.4.2-7 (not provided)
package libtool needs pam = 1.4.2-7 (not provided)
package pam-devel needs pam = 0.75-46.7.3 (not provided)
package pam-devel needs pam = 0.75-46.7.3 (not provided)
[root@teddy yum]# ls
rpm-python-4.0.4-7x.18.i386.rpm  yum-1.0.3-7sme03.noarch.rpm
[root@teddy yum]#


Any ideas...?
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: william_syd on October 17, 2005, 10:28:58 AM
Ok.. sorted.

Got the rpm's from fedora.

I must have installed some developer stuff along the way...
Title: Re: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: Denbert on October 23, 2005, 12:06:01 PM
Quote from: "wellsi"
The maintenance team would like to announce that the following packages are available from the updates repositories for SME 6.0 & 6.0.1. These updates can also be applied to 6.5RC1.


To update your server see http://no.longer.valid/phpwiki/index.php/How%20to%20update%20SME%20Server
To help this process see http://no.longer.valid/phpwiki/index.php/Maintenance%20Process


   Users of mc are advised to upgrade to these packages, which contain
   backported security patches to correct these issues.


Hi,

As I’m moving to newer hardware I’ve been testing this update and they works fantastic – thanks to the maintenance team.

How about the updates made by Knuddi: http://forums.contribs.org/index.php?topic=23074.msg91669#msg91669

Should they be applied to the YUM or are they not needed anymore?

About YUM the European users might be happier with the following mirrors set in the /etc/yum.conf:

[common-updates]
name=SME Server 6.x base updates
baseurl=http://mirror.contribs.org/smeserver/releases/$releasever/updates-common/i386/
gpgcheck=0

[updates]
name=SME Server $releasever updates
baseurl=http://mirror.contribs.org/smeserver/releases/$releasever/updates/i386/
gpgcheck=0

This mirror runs at least 400 kb/s from my location in Copenhagen  :-D
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: smeghead on October 24, 2005, 07:32:04 PM
.. and for Australia:

[os]
name=SME Server $releasever os
baseurl=http://mirror.pacific.net.au/pub/ibiblio/distributions/smeserver/releases/$releasever/os/e-smith/RPMS/
gpgcheck=0

[common-updates]
name=SME Server 6.x base updates
baseurl=http://mirror.pacific.net.au/pub/ibiblio/distributions/smeserver/releases/$releasever/updates-common/i386/
gpgcheck=0

[updates]
name=SME Server $releasever updates
baseurl=http://mirror.pacific.net.au/pub/ibiblio/distributions/smeserver/releases/$releasever/updates/i386/
gpgcheck=0
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: Alex Schaft on November 15, 2005, 05:26:11 AM
Quote from: "william_syd"
Ok.. sorted.

Got the rpm's from fedora.

I must have installed some developer stuff along the way...


Could you send me a link to which fedora and rpm's you used?

Thanks,
Alex
Title: SME 6 Maintenance Updates 23rd September 2005
Post by: william_syd on November 15, 2005, 05:04:23 PM
They were for Redhat 7.3 from Fedora legacy.

It was only these two that I needed from memory..

https://www.magicwilly.info/yum/rpm/ (https://www.magicwilly.info/yum/rpm/)

Quote from: "Elax"
Quote from: "william_syd"
Ok.. sorted.

Got the rpm's from fedora.

I must have installed some developer stuff along the way...


Could you send me a link to which fedora and rpm's you used?

Thanks,
Alex