On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Jamie Strandboge <email address hidden> wrote:
> Thanks for your debdiff Brian! :) Here are some comments:
>
> 1. You have supplied two patches for CVE-2008-1897
> (debian/patches/CVE-2008-1897 and debian/patches/asterisk-CVE-2008-1897).
> Please remove asterisk-CVE-2008-1897
Bah! I didn't even see that, sorry. That was left over from some earlier
quilt tinkering. Will remove it straight away.
It's been so long I'm not sure. I'll do this one from scratch again.
>
> 3. The debian/changelog description does not conform to
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation#Update%20the%20packaging.
> These guidelines are in place for clarity, so someone knows quickly what
> patch goes with which CVE and upstream references. Can you adjust so each
> patch has its own stanza?
OK
>
> 4. The package uses quilt, which supports comments at the top of the patch.
> Specifically, the added patches in debian/patches should use
> UbuntuDevelopment/PatchTaggingGuidelines (see
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation#Patch)
Off the top of my head, one of these upstream hadn't fixed at the time, a
couple were basically duplicates, and I don't recall the other off the top
of my head. Before resubmitting the debdiff, I'll also look these up again
and comment in the bug. Yes, if they need attention, I fully plan on
handling them as well.
I'll also resubmit with the intrepid patch next time.
Thanks as always for your patience as I get accustomed to these processes
Jamie!
Thanks Jamie,
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Jamie Strandboge <email address hidden> wrote:
> Thanks for your debdiff Brian! :) Here are some comments: patches/ CVE-2008- 1897 and debian/ patches/ asterisk- CVE-2008- 1897). CVE-2008- 1897
>
> 1. You have supplied two patches for CVE-2008-1897
> (debian/
> Please remove asterisk-
Bah! I didn't even see that, sorry. That was left over from some earlier
quilt tinkering. Will remove it straight away.
> downloads. digium. com/pub/ security/ AST-2008- 006.html ( downloads. digium. com/pub/ security/ AST-2008- 006.html). Was the patch
> 2. CVE-2008-1897 seems to be missing parts of upstream's
> http://
> http://
> misapplied? If not, can you explain why it isn't applied?
It's been so long I'm not sure. I'll do this one from scratch again.
> /wiki.ubuntu. com/SecurityTea m/UpdatePrepara tion#Update% 20the%20packagi ng.
> 3. The debian/changelog description does not conform to
> https:/
> These guidelines are in place for clarity, so someone knows quickly what
> patch goes with which CVE and upstream references. Can you adjust so each
> patch has its own stanza?
OK
> nt/PatchTagging Guidelines (see /wiki.ubuntu. com/SecurityTea m/UpdatePrepara tion#Patch)
> 4. The package uses quilt, which supports comments at the top of the patch.
> Specifically, the added patches in debian/patches should use
> UbuntuDevelopme
> https:/
OK
> people. ubuntu. com/~ubuntu- security/ cve/universe. html#universe<http:// people. ubuntu. com/%7Eubuntu- security/ cve/universe. html#universe>)
> 5. Our tracker (see
> http://
> shows that hardy asterisk is also vulnerable to CVE-2008-3903,
> CVE-2008-1923, CVE-2009-0871 and CVE-2008-1390. Were you planning to do
> updates for these as well?
>
Off the top of my head, one of these upstream hadn't fixed at the time, a
couple were basically duplicates, and I don't recall the other off the top
of my head. Before resubmitting the debdiff, I'll also look these up again
and comment in the bug. Yes, if they need attention, I fully plan on
handling them as well.
I'll also resubmit with the intrepid patch next time.
Thanks as always for your patience as I get accustomed to these processes
Jamie!
-Brian