oss-sec mailing list archives
Re: Re: CVE request: openjpeg: incorrect fix for CVE-2013-6045 (was Re: openjpeg CVE-2016-3181, CVE-2016-3182 .. and CVE-2013-6045)
From: Raphael Geissert <geissert () debian org>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 17:22:22 +0100
Mitre, On 6 October 2016 at 03:16, Doran Moppert <dmoppert () redhat com> wrote:
Do you specifically know of a distribution that still has that patch?Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Ubuntu LTS seem to be still carrying the original patch. Possibly others, but these are the only ones I've identified.I should have included this reference: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382202
It appears that this request fell through the cracks? Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Developer www.debian.org - get.debian.net
Current thread:
- Re: openjpeg CVE-2016-3181, CVE-2016-3182 .. and CVE-2013-6045 Raphael Geissert (Oct 05)
- CVE request: openjpeg: incorrect fix for CVE-2013-6045 (was Re: openjpeg CVE-2016-3181, CVE-2016-3182 .. and CVE-2013-6045) Doran Moppert (Oct 05)
- Re: CVE request: openjpeg: incorrect fix for CVE-2013-6045 (was Re: openjpeg CVE-2016-3181, CVE-2016-3182 .. and CVE-2013-6045) Doran Moppert (Oct 05)
- Re: Re: CVE request: openjpeg: incorrect fix for CVE-2013-6045 (was Re: openjpeg CVE-2016-3181, CVE-2016-3182 .. and CVE-2013-6045) Raphael Geissert (Nov 29)
- Re: CVE request: openjpeg: incorrect fix for CVE-2013-6045 (was Re: openjpeg CVE-2016-3181, CVE-2016-3182 .. and CVE-2013-6045) Doran Moppert (Oct 05)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: openjpeg CVE-2016-3181, CVE-2016-3182 .. and CVE-2013-6045 cve-assign (Nov 29)
- CVE request: openjpeg: incorrect fix for CVE-2013-6045 (was Re: openjpeg CVE-2016-3181, CVE-2016-3182 .. and CVE-2013-6045) Doran Moppert (Oct 05)