3 ms·
> Only two remote holes in the default install, in a heck of a long time! As someone who doesn't know this kind of stuff well, will this cause OpenBSD to have
by alberth 2y ago
> Only two remote holes in the default install, in a heck of a long time!
As someone who doesn't know this kind of stuff well, will this cause OpenBSD to have to update the statement above?
https://www.openbsd.org https://www.openbsd.org
EDIT:
TFA says:
> OpenBSD is not vulnerable.
- rany_ 2y agoOpenBSD isn't vulnerable, from https://www.qualys.com/2024/07/01/cve-2024-6387/regresshion.txt https://www.qualys.com/2024/07/01/cve-2024-6387/regresshion....: > We have not investigated any other libc or operating system; but OpenBSD is notably not vulnerable, because its SIGALRM handler calls syslog_r(), an async-signal-safer version of syslog() that was invented by OpenBSD in 2001.