Re: [Full-Disclosure] new ssh exploit?

[Ron DuFresne <dufresne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Bennett Todd wrote:

> 2003-09-16T11:25:47 Ron DuFresne:
> > On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, christopher neitzert wrote:
> > > 1. upgrade to lsh.
> >
> > But, one has to remember ssh does not stand alone, at least openssh, it
> > needs openssl to be properly maintained as well.
>
> Another incentive to ditch openssh altogether. lsh seems to work
> fine. At last.
>
> lsh doesn't use openssl. It is a completely different code base from
> the other sshes.

Interesting.  Don't see many posts from you these day Bennett, good to see
you live <smile>.  Got a pointer?  I'd seek out myselfm, but have a huge
project that's eating me up at present.  SSH and openssl is fast heading
down the upgrade,patch,upgrade,patch scenerio of sendmail and wu_ftpd in
the 90's.


>
> It's ssh v2 only; I think that's a transition whose time has come.

This I will agree to fully, though, since we see the R* commands persist,
and ftpd refuses to die, the list goes on. Don;t a number of appliances
also use ssh1 and are not upgradeable?


But, yes, ssh1 should have died a year or 4 ago <smile>>

Thanks,

Ron DuFresne
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Cutting the space budget really restores my faith in humanity.  It
eliminates dreams, goals, and ideals and lets us get straight to the
business of hate, debauchery, and self-annihilation." -- Johnny Hart
        ***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!***

OK, so you're a Ph.D.  Just don't touch anything.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html