Linux Kernel 2.6.11.9 Released (Security Update) 26

Posted by timothy on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @02:02PM from the small-change dept.

GnuTer writes "Greg KH has just announced the availability of the newest Linux kernel release, 2.6.11.9. This version fixes various local vulnerabilities and exploits. You can get it from the usual mirrors at kernel.org/mirrors."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux Kernel 2.6.11.9 Released (Security Update)

Load All Comments

Search 26 Comments Log In/Create an Account

Comments Filter:

2.6.11.10 (Score:5, Informative)

by jtshaw ( 398319 ) * writes: on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @02:03PM (#12557744) Homepage

2.6.11.10 is out as of May 16th....

Share
twitter facebook
2.6.11.10 (Score:1, Informative)

by Merlin42 ( 148225 ) * writes:

actually its 2.6.11.10 that was just released
#oldnews (Score:4, Informative)

by irc.goatse.cx troll ( 593289 ) writes: on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @02:05PM (#12557774) Journal

We just got done upgrading our kernel, except we upgraded to 2.6.11.10
Changelog: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/Change Log-2.6.11.10 [kernel.org]

Share
twitter facebook
- Re:#oldnews (Score:1)
  
  by dotgain ( 630123 ) writes:
  
  Thanks for that link. I've always wondered how to find the changelogs...
Lies! (Score:1, Funny)

by rudy_wayne ( 414635 ) writes:

"This version fixes various local vulnerabilities and exploits."

Everyone knows that only Windows has vulnerabilities and exploits.
- Re:Lies! (Score:2)
  
  by linguae ( 763922 ) writes:
  
  Come on. Even OpenBSD has vulnerabilities every now and then. No current operating system is 100% secure.
  - Re:Lies! (Score:1)
    
    by niteice ( 793961 ) writes:
    
    Even OpenBSD has vulnerabilities every now and then.
    
    But they've already been fixed for a few months.
i think you mean... (Score:2, Interesting)

by martinjd ( 1169 ) writes:

yeah, i think you mean Linux 2.6.11.10
from the changelog:
author Greg KH Mon, 16 May 2005 10:48:16 -0700
committer Greg KH Mon, 16 May 2005 10:48:16 -0700

Linux 2.6.11.10
- Re:i think you mean... (Score:2)
  
  by anpe ( 217106 ) writes:
  
  There has been to security releases in a row actually: 2.6.11.9 and 2.6.11.10
Not too clear on the requirements (Score:2, Insightful)

by Mad Merlin ( 837387 ) writes:

The advisory wasn't entirely clear on who this affected, it's clear that it's an issue with reading or writing a DVD drive (from the /dev/hdc found in the code and the name of the function), but what privledges does the attacker need to use this exploit? Raw read/write to a DVD drive? Raw read only to a DVD drive? Plain read only? Anybody know for sure?
- Re:Not too clear on the requirements (Score:1)
  
  by dpilot ( 134227 ) writes:
  
  I don't know how it interacts with this particular bug, but the same drive can be used to get packet write on a CDRW drive. In other words, turn a CDRW into a 670MB UDF floppy. Don't know if this is regular user or root-only access. But I have my system set so regular users can mount CDRWs in big-floppy mode.
Only a typo. (Score:4, Insightful)

by Saiyine ( 689367 ) writes: on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @02:35PM (#12558149) Homepage

It's obviusly only a typo, as the urls link to the correct kernel version.

Real problem are the (paid!) editors that don't even check the submissions... So forget about TFA!

Share
twitter facebook
Pathetic linux development .... (Score:3, Funny)

by bitsformoney ( 514101 ) writes: on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @02:45PM (#12558279)

is basically crawling to a halt, given they're now down to increasing the fourth number in the version number .... sheesh ...

Share
twitter facebook
- Re:Pathetic linux development .... (Score:2, Funny)
  
  by Reorax ( 629666 ) writes:
  
  Yeah, they should increase the third number, so that they get much more work done.
  - The real answer... (Score:3)
    
    by jd ( 1658 ) writes:
    
    ...is to add a fifth number, to reflect the number of times that version of the kernel has been downloaded. And maybe a sixth, to reflect the number of patchsets are being actively maintained in parallel with that version.
    Does anyone remember the days that pre-releases had a letter of the alphabet attached, and cycles greater than 26 before the next "real" release were not uncommon? We're only on the tenth post-release and fourth pre-release - these are nothing, compared to past cycles, and really do ref
For those on the bleeding edge (Score:3, Interesting)

by jd ( 1658 ) writes: <imipak@NOSpaM.yahoo.com> on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @03:47PM (#12559025) Homepage Journal

The current bleeding-edge kernel is 2.6.12-rc4-mm2 [kernel.org], which now seems to have at least some parts of the kitchen sink included. (I've not used vanilla kernels for a long time - the patchsets are usually much more feature-rich, often just as stable, and have a certain geekiness factor.)

Share
twitter facebook
- Re:For those on the bleeding edge (Score:2)
  
  by Sancho ( 17056 ) writes:
  
  What patches do you recommend, anyway? I've used the Gentoo patchset before, but my machine requires a patch which conflicts with those, so I'm relegated to the vanilla kernel for now.
  - Re:For those on the bleeding edge (Score:2)
    
    by jd ( 1658 ) writes:
    
    Patches tend to be obnoxious in that way. One of these days, I'm going to find the time to start building oversized patchsets again, as it is getting hard to find one patch that includes everything you need.
    For the "latest build" stuff, I definitely suggest using the Andrew Morton patches. If you're more interested in network-intensive stuff, then I'd recommend the QoS patchset for the kernel, as that comes with some more schedulers and a whole load of netfilter stuff.
    For stability with some extra stuf
  - Re:For those on the bleeding edge (Score:1)
    
    by randomblast ( 730328 ) writes:
    
    For a desktop machine, definitely use CKO [p.lodz.pl].
paranoia (Score:2, Insightful)

by bzipitidoo ( 647217 ) writes:

I downloaded 2.6.11.10 yesterday. When I saw this story, my first instant thought was that I'd been tricked, perhaps by a corrupt DNS cache [slashdot.org] that pointed me to a bogus www.kernel.org [kernel.org]. Maybe I should actually check those digital signatures. Good thing I haven't untarred and compiled 2.6.11.10 yet.
But now, reading all these posts that point out the story is mistaken, and should say 2.6.11.10, not 2.6.11.9, I feel much better. So, uh, how do you check those signatures?
- Re:paranoia (Score:3, Informative)
  
  by thinkliberty ( 593776 ) writes:
  
  You check it with:
  
  gpg --verify kernel.sig kernel.tar
  
  It's all on kernel.org's website:
  http://www.kernel.org/signature.html [kernel.org]

There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.

Linux Kernel 2.6.11.9 Released (Security Update) 26

Linux Kernel 2.6.11.9 Released (Security Update) More Login

Linux Kernel 2.6.11.9 Released (Security Update)

2.6.11.10 (Score:5, Informative)

2.6.11.10 (Score:1, Informative)

#oldnews (Score:4, Informative)

Re:#oldnews (Score:1)

Lies! (Score:1, Funny)

Re:Lies! (Score:2)

Re:Lies! (Score:1)

i think you mean... (Score:2, Interesting)

Re:i think you mean... (Score:2)

Not too clear on the requirements (Score:2, Insightful)

Re:Not too clear on the requirements (Score:1)

Only a typo. (Score:4, Insightful)

Pathetic linux development .... (Score:3, Funny)

Re:Pathetic linux development .... (Score:2, Funny)

The real answer... (Score:3)

For those on the bleeding edge (Score:3, Interesting)

Re:For those on the bleeding edge (Score:2)

Re:For those on the bleeding edge (Score:2)

Re:For those on the bleeding edge (Score:1)

paranoia (Score:2, Insightful)

Re:paranoia (Score:3, Informative)

Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.

Slashdot Top Deals

Slashdot