Hi, On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 03:10:10PM +0000, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 05:04:22PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 09:46:14PM +0200, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > > > * Serge E. Hallyn <se...@hallyn.com> [250422 15:48]: > > > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 08:08:50PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > > > > Thought this will not really be fixable in code, it depends on how > > > > > uids were assigned in within a group of systems form system > > > > > administrators. Let's link downstream bugreport and upstream and maybe > > > > > they come up with a documentation update reflecting the issue? > > > > > > > > > > For further information see: > > > > > > > > > > [0] https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2024-56433 > > > > > https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-56433 > > > > > [1] https://github.com/shadow-maint/shadow/issues/1157 > > > > > > > > There is no id range that couldn't possibly conflict with some > > > > site's network ids. The only default safe for that concern is > > > > to not automatically enable any subids. > > > > > > Indeed. The question really is: what are we gonna do? > > > > > > Should there be some form of documentation update, like a README? > > > > Maybe debian changelog? > > Or maybe simply add a note in the existing README.Debian?
In my opinion if it can be added to upstream documentation that would be ideal, but agree that for Debian purposes otherwise we can add a note on the problem to the README.Debian (or both in the end). Chris, what do you think with you maintainer hat on here? Regards, Salvatore
