From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/7424 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Harald Becker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Re: Security advisory for musl libc - stack-based buffer overflow in ipv6 literal parsing [CVE-2015-1817] Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 20:47:39 +0200 Message-ID: <5532A6CB.9030704@gmx.de> References: <20150417131008.GE17615@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> <20150417172327.GB6817@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150417180325.GC6817@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150417180907.GA26856@openwall.com> <20150418133202.GG17615@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> <20150418152542.GG6817@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <55327D1F.5070807@gmx.de> <20150418155845.GH6817@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <55328604.4000705@gmx.de> <20150418163702.GI6817@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <55328F53.1070705@gmx.de> <5532A219.7010200@skarnet.org> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1429382875 11144 80.91.229.3 (18 Apr 2015 18:47:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 18:47:55 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-7437-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat Apr 18 20:47:54 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YjXmU-0006cL-BV for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 20:47:54 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 21576 invoked by uid 550); 18 Apr 2015 18:47:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 21558 invoked from network); 18 Apr 2015 18:47:52 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 In-Reply-To: <5532A219.7010200@skarnet.org> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:9LYOT8qQXRq6NBy5e9Pub5YMTnUwxQa08n4ILnd4dSrwMzNsZmN z5e5Fm0YMRMLntonaFTToWQOvjzFEsxz95mjZSOfR8d4ZGbCjnZRIJ0kBt8VT3v9G10HfK4 3MZWEn+vSX0ElLGBmeffuhAsfOqAbcJ6jdYGnbVL6sKSu31XxT9iS+G1GTZNJRWmYNxvJ5Z 83gx0Ia9yhevwBX7R8qaQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:7424 Archived-At: Hi Laurent ! On 18.04.2015 20:27, Laurent Bercot wrote: > Indeed. The normative text is RFC 2181, section 10.3 : it explicitly > forbids MX targets to be a CNAME. Most modern MTAs don't care, but some > old ones *cough* sendmail *cough* do. The problem is, even mail relays of big Internet providers fail on this. AFAIK, United Internet uses a qmail based system. Harald