Re: CVE-2014-7169 vs CVE-2014-6271

2014-09-27 Thread Chet Ramey
On 9/26/14, 1:06 PM, Alan Wild wrote: > Not that I get a "vote", but if I did... I'm completely supportive of > dropping function "importing" support when bash is invoked as /bin/sh (or > --posix). This is clearly bash-specific functionality that isn't needed > for POSIX-compliance. Seams like a

Re: CVE-2014-7169 vs CVE-2014-6271

2014-09-27 Thread Chet Ramey
On 9/26/14, 12:58 PM, Alan Wild wrote: > I've been searching for some clarification on these two "fixes" and I'm > utterly confused. I've been lead to believe RedHat's first patch (6271) is > based on code from Chet that just causes bash to reject functions where > code appears outside of the func

Re: CVE-2014-7169 vs CVE-2014-6271

2014-09-26 Thread Alan Wild
Yes, again... I was specifically working only with Red Hat patches. I hadn't actually seen Chet's patches anywhere (thanks for the link). However, I was concerned that Red Hat was setting a major precedent and effectively forking bash (arguably that is the case, but in a much more minor way then I

Re: CVE-2014-7169 vs CVE-2014-6271

2014-09-26 Thread Eric Blake
On 09/26/2014 02:57 PM, Alan Wild wrote: > I want to apologize for adding more confusion to this issue. My statements > about CVE-2014-7169 where incorrect and misguided. This change does not > remove function exporting but only changes how the function names are > encoded as variable names. Act

Re: CVE-2014-7169 vs CVE-2014-6271

2014-09-26 Thread Alan Wild
I want to apologize for adding more confusion to this issue. My statements about CVE-2014-7169 where incorrect and misguided. This change does not remove function exporting but only changes how the function names are encoded as variable names. Because the published CVE-2014-6271 vulnerability tes

Re: CVE-2014-7169 vs CVE-2014-6271

2014-09-26 Thread Eric Blake
On 09/26/2014 10:58 AM, Alan Wild wrote: > I've been searching for some clarification on these two "fixes" and I'm > utterly confused. I've been lead to believe RedHat's first patch (6271) is [Red Hat is two words.] > based on code from Chet that just causes bash to reject functions where > code

Re: CVE-2014-7169 vs CVE-2014-6271

2014-09-26 Thread Alan Wild
Not that I get a "vote", but if I did... I'm completely supportive of dropping function "importing" support when bash is invoked as /bin/sh (or --posix). This is clearly bash-specific functionality that isn't needed for POSIX-compliance. Seams like a much more reasonable middle-ground then pullin