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

limits of automatic unclaiming (Re: pdns/pdns-recursor)

Hi Abhijith, Antoine,

I just ran "./bin/review-update-needed --lts --unclaim 1814400 --exclude
linux linux-4.9" today and it unclaimed pdns/pdns-recursor as the last
NOTE entries were more than 3 weeks ago. However Abhijith wrote here:

On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 01:02:06PM +0530, Abhijith PA wrote:
> I am currently working on pdns[1] and pdns-recursor's[2] security issues
> and which are marked as no-DSA, postponed. Last month I picked it up as
> I had some time remaining. Upstream patch is available for the remaining
> issues(CVE-2018-10851, CVE-2018-14644). Both patches contain C++11
> specific code and I was only able to port CVE-2018-14644. In
> CVE-2018-10851 I used 'boost' library's smart pointers to deal with the
> default C++11 smart pointers, but I am not quite there. I was wondering
> whether anyone here can _help_ me with it. I don't want to spend anymore

Abhijith, thanks for this update! Just please also update the notes for
these packages in data/dla-needed.txt.

Antoine, this is an example were automatic unclaim might be problematic,
as it would have unclaimed pdns/pdns-recursor which is not ideal. (For
now, just ment as a data point.)

> time in it as it is not so popular one and it has no-DSA postponed
> priority.

pdnsd is used by our sponsors so we should support it as best as we can.


       PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: