Comments on: Linux groups patch image flaw

Common code used to process graphics has a flaw that could allow an attacker to issue commands as the user.

[Andrew J Glina]

Hypocritical

If this was a story about a Windows flaw being fixed, no matter how fast, how minor it was or how well it was done, there would be a flood of comments from the Linux/Apple faithful. Maybe people are used to Linux being flawed so it isn?t worth commenting on.

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Read my next comment related to this...

...

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Looks like a Gnome vulnerability not Linux

I didn't see anything in the report that mentions
a Linux kernel flaw. The OS kernel generally doesn't
process images, so, I was a little confused when I
first read the title. It is like saying an Adobe
image library vulnerability is a Windows problem.
Not quite accurate. One can always develop an
application or library to circumvent the system,
it isn't necessarily the OS's fault.

[Tex Murphy PI]

Look at the facts, and stop creating another Holy War.

KDE or GNOME - if it is a shell, it's still part of the OS.

I am amazed that MS came out with a fix to this vulnerability before the Linux community did!

I guess even MS can work quickly to fix a problem if you light enough matches under their feet! :)

[Andrew J Glina]

I stand by my point

When was the last time that you heard of a security issue with the NT Kernel? Do you think that the NT Kernel handles images? I really don't see why you are mentioning Kernels. I didn't. Most of the problems of Windows are releated to the interface too. All software has it's problems, not just Microsofts. That was my point.

[David Arbogast]

Thanks Andrew

A splash of reality is nice when zealots start preaching their faith.

[George Cole]

problems of Windows

http://www.analogstereo.com/kia_spectra_owners_manual.htm

Story incorrect, comments worse

Versions of GNOME in the 1.x series are affected by the imlib vulnerabilities discussed in this article, however, GNOME 1.x is not a "recent" version of GNOME by any stretch of the imagination. The 2.x series (which there have been four "minor" series of in the past two and a half years) does not use imlib, and the only distribution which continues to ship GNOME 1.x is debian woody (which will be replaced by sarge in a short while).

To compare GNOME 1.x and 2.x is roughly equivalent code-wise to comparing Windows NT4 to Windows 2000, or Windows 95 to Windows 3.1. Most of the code has been changed and rewritten, and all of the image handling (which this bug is an instance of) has. If you want a rough parallel, this is similar to discovering a bug that only occurs in Windows NT4 and claiming it affects "recent" versions of Windows.

I should note, regarding the comments, that this particular security issue was discovered as a result of independent code auditing by a random user of the imlib library--something that is legally impossible in the closed source world, unless you feel like paying money and signing all types of NDAs, which would almost certainly preclude disclosure of this type of vulnerability -- which means that even if somebody paid the money to see the code and found a vulnerability like this, you probably wouldn't hear about it until after an update is ready or someone *else* tests things the hard way and discovers the same issue independently. Further, unless you are doing something dumb, like running as the "root" user (Administrator in Windows NT/2k+/XP), this bug will only affect *your* user, and not the entire system. Finally, this issue has never been exploited (to my knowledge) "in the wild", merely in some guy's apartment.

James Cape
http://esco.mine.nu/

[David Arbogast]

Article is not wrong

The article does in fact state that this vulnerabilty exists in older Gnome packages. Its in the first paragraph, so there is nothing wrong with the assessment.

Just like flaws in older versions of Windows give anti-MS folks a reason to flame the software company, flaws in older versions of Linux are likewise targets for criticism. Why? Because there is still an affected install base. The difference, is that each distributor of Linux is working to patch the problem, meaning that different distros have different security problems at any given time.

Sure... somebody found this flaw a few years after it was created, in their own home. Something that could not be done with code from a closed-source system. You are correct. Of course, it is only a matter of luck that the person was willing to report the flaw instead of exploiting it.

[Ubber geek]

closed source world

http://www.analogstereo.com/cassette_deck_nakamichi_bx_300.htm