SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

September 2014

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
John Rowe <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
John Rowe <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 25 Sep 2014 10:26:53 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
On Thu, 2014-09-25 at 09:16 +0000, Werf, C.G. van der (Carel) wrote:
> Yesterday a lot of yum-updates ran to update to the latest bash-versions.
> 
> Though my /bin/bash was changed last night, and yum.log shows 3.2.33 should have installed, 
> # /bin/bash --version still shows 3.2.25
> 
> Ofcourse, also # strings /bin/bash  shows old version number.
> 
> Is this a policy NOT to change version-numbers ? 

It's worth pointing out that there has just been a serious (and possibly
remote!) bash vulnerability which this fixes. 

A test is:

env X="() { :;} ; echo vulnerable" /bin/bash -c "echo completed"


My systems were echoing "vulnerable" before the fix but not after.

John

ATOM RSS1 RSS2