[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Heimdal 1.1 telnetd broken under Solaris 10

To: hotz@jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: Heimdal 1.1 telnetd broken under Solaris 10
From: Harald Barth <haba@kth.se>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:32:23 +0100 (CET)
Cc: heimdal-discuss@sics.se
In-Reply-To: <BB219765-5C95-473D-8B4C-5190BC211196@jpl.nasa.gov>
List-Archive: <http://list.sics.se/sympa/arc/heimdal-discuss>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa@sics.se?subject=help>
List-Id: <heimdal-discuss.sics.se>
List-Owner: <mailto:heimdal-discuss-request@sics.se>
List-Post: <mailto:heimdal-discuss@sics.se>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:sympa@sics.se?subject=subscribe%20heimdal-discuss>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:sympa@sics.se?subject=unsubscribe%20heimdal-discuss>
References: <20080125.142136.132382286.haba@habanero.pdc.kth.se><CB20D499-A6F2-4121-8D7F-660094D0A03C@assv.net><BB219765-5C95-473D-8B4C-5190BC211196@jpl.nasa.gov>
Reply-To: heimdal-discuss@sics.se, Harald Barth <haba@kth.se>


> Doesn't the Solaris 10 telnetd do Kerberos? That lowers the
> importance of Heimdal's considerably, I think.

Does it really matter what Solaris' in.telnetd does support?
I have seen considerable evidence in the past that it does a
lot more than it should.

Just one example:
> CERT VU#881872 at http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/881872
> CVE-2007-0882 at http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2007-0882

Harald.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Heimdal 1.1 telnetd broken under Solaris 10
  - From: "Henry B. Hotz" <hotz@jpl.nasa.gov>

References:
- Re: Heimdal 1.1 telnetd broken under Solaris 10
  - From: Ian Delahorne <ian@assv.net>
- Re: Heimdal 1.1 telnetd broken under Solaris 10
  - From: "Henry B. Hotz" <hotz@jpl.nasa.gov>

Prev by Date: current SVN not passing 'make check'
Next by Date: Re: current SVN not passing 'make check'
Prev by thread: Re: Heimdal 1.1 telnetd broken under Solaris 10
Next by thread: Re: Heimdal 1.1 telnetd broken under Solaris 10
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread