Debian: DSA-3691-2: ghostscript regression update

    Date28 Oct 2016
    CategoryDebian
    48
    Posted ByLinuxSecurity Advisories
    The update for ghostscript issued as DSA-3691-1 caused regressions for certain Postscript document viewers (evince, zathura). Updated packages are now available to address this problem. For reference, the original advisory text follows.
    
    - -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Debian Security Advisory DSA-3691-2                   This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
    https://www.debian.org/security/                     Salvatore Bonaccorso
    October 28, 2016                      https://www.debian.org/security/faq
    - -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Package        : ghostscript
    Debian Bug     : 840691
    
    The update for ghostscript issued as DSA-3691-1 caused regressions for
    certain Postscript document viewers (evince, zathura). Updated packages
    are now available to address this problem. For reference, the original
    advisory text follows.
    
    Several vulnerabilities were discovered in Ghostscript, the GPL
    PostScript/PDF interpreter, which may lead to the execution of arbitrary
    code or information disclosure if a specially crafted Postscript file is
    processed.
    
    For the stable distribution (jessie), this problem has been fixed in
    version 9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u4.
    
    We recommend that you upgrade your ghostscript packages.
    
    Further information about Debian Security Advisories, how to apply
    these updates to your system and frequently asked questions can be
    found at: https://www.debian.org/security/
    
    Mailing list: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
    
    You are not authorised to post comments.

    Comments powered by CComment

    LinuxSecurity Poll

    What do you think of the articles on LinuxSecurity?

    No answer selected. Please try again.
    Please select either existing option or enter your own, however not both.
    Please select minimum 0 answer(s) and maximum 3 answer(s).
    /main-polls/24-what-do-you-think-of-the-quality-of-the-articles-on-linuxsecurity?task=poll.vote&format=json
    24
    radio
    [{"id":"87","title":"Excellent, don't change a thing!","votes":"13","type":"x","order":"1","pct":52,"resources":[]},{"id":"88","title":"Should be more technical","votes":"4","type":"x","order":"2","pct":16,"resources":[]},{"id":"89","title":"Should include more HOWTOs","votes":"8","type":"x","order":"3","pct":32,"resources":[]}]["#ff5b00","#4ac0f2","#b80028","#eef66c","#60bb22","#b96a9a","#62c2cc"]["rgba(255,91,0,0.7)","rgba(74,192,242,0.7)","rgba(184,0,40,0.7)","rgba(238,246,108,0.7)","rgba(96,187,34,0.7)","rgba(185,106,154,0.7)","rgba(98,194,204,0.7)"]350
    bottom200

    We use cookies to provide and improve our services. By using our site, you consent to our Cookie Policy.