Audit Linux privileges now to limit compromise, escalation, and system-wide damage. Review Linux Privileges×

Alerts This Week
Warning Icon 1 498
Alerts This Week
Warning Icon 1 498

Stay Secure with the Latest Linux Advisories

Filter%20icon Refine advisories
X Clear Filters
X Clear Filters
View More

Get the latest News and Insights

Get the latest Linux and open source security news straight to your inbox.

Community Poll

Should Linux servers automatically install security updates?

No answer selected. Please try again.
Please select either existing option or enter your own, however not both.
Please select minimum {0} answer(s).
Please select maximum {0} answer(s).
/main-polls/157-should-linux-servers-automatically-install-security-updates?task=poll.vote&format=json
157
radio
0
[{"id":506,"title":"Yes \u2014 critical security patches should install automatically.","votes":0,"type":"x","order":1,"pct":0,"resources":[]},{"id":507,"title":"No \u2014 every update should be tested before deployment.","votes":3,"type":"x","order":2,"pct":60,"resources":[]},{"id":508,"title":"Only critical vulnerabilities should auto-install.","votes":0,"type":"x","order":3,"pct":0,"resources":[]},{"id":509,"title":"I patch when Reddit starts panicking.","votes":2,"type":"x","order":4,"pct":40,"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
bottom 200
Loading...

Explore Latest Linux Security advisories

We found -8 articles for you...
200

Scientific Linux: CVE-2012-3417 Low Severity: Quota Remote Access Issue

Low: quota security and bug fix update. Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:10:14 -0600 Reply-To: Pat Riehecky Sender: Security Errata for Scientific Linux From: Pat Riehecky Organization: Fermilab Subject: Security ERRATA Low: quota on SL5.x i386/x86_64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Synopsis: Low: quota security and bug fix update Issue Date: 2013-01-08 CVE Numbers: CVE-2012-3417 -- It was discovered that the rpc.rquotad service did not use tcp_wrapperscorrectly. Certain hosts access rules defined in "/etc/hosts.allow" and "/etc/hosts.deny" may not have been honored, possibly allowing remote attackersto bypass intended access restrictions. (CVE-2012-3417) This update also fixes the following bugs: * Prior to this update, values were not properly transported via the remote procedure call (RPC) and interpreted by the client when querying the quota usage or limits for network-mounted file systems if the quota values were 2^32 kilobytes or greater. As a consequence, the client reported mangled values. This update modifies the underlying code so that such values are correctly interpreted by the client. * Prior to this update, warnquota sent messages about exceeded quota limits from a valid domain name if the warnquota tool was enabled to send warning e-mails and the superuser did not change the default warnquota configuration. As a consequence, the recipient could reply to invalid addresses. This update modifies the default warnquota configuration to use the reserved . domain. Now, warnings about exceeded quota limits are sent from the reserved domain that inform the superuser to change to the correct value. * Previously, quota utilities could not recognize the file system as having quotas enabled and refused to operate on it due to incorrect updating of /etc/mtab. This update prefers /proc/mounts to get a list of file systems with enabled quotas. Now, quota utilities recognize file systems with enabled quotas as expected. * Prior to this update, the setquota(8) tool on XFS file systems failed to set disk limits to valuesgreater than 2^31 kilobytes. This update modifies the integer conversion in the setquota(8) tool to use a 64-bit variable big enough to store such values. -- SL5 x86_64 quota-3.13-8.el5.x86_64.rpm quota-debuginfo-3.13-8.el5.x86_64.rpm i386 quota-3.13-8.el5.i386.rpm quota-debuginfo-3.13-8.el5.i386.rpm - Scientific Linux Development Team . A recent security patch for Scientific Linux has been released, aimed at resolving remote access vulnerabilities and fixing multiple bugs.. quota security fix, Scientific Linux update, remote access vulnerabilities. . Severity: Low. LinuxSecurity.com Team

Calendar%202 Jan 16, 2013 Low Scientific Linux
News Add Esm H240

Get the latest News and Insights

Get the latest Linux and open source security news straight to your inbox.

Community Poll

Should Linux servers automatically install security updates?

No answer selected. Please try again.
Please select either existing option or enter your own, however not both.
Please select minimum {0} answer(s).
Please select maximum {0} answer(s).
/main-polls/157-should-linux-servers-automatically-install-security-updates?task=poll.vote&format=json
157
radio
0
[{"id":506,"title":"Yes \u2014 critical security patches should install automatically.","votes":0,"type":"x","order":1,"pct":0,"resources":[]},{"id":507,"title":"No \u2014 every update should be tested before deployment.","votes":3,"type":"x","order":2,"pct":60,"resources":[]},{"id":508,"title":"Only critical vulnerabilities should auto-install.","votes":0,"type":"x","order":3,"pct":0,"resources":[]},{"id":509,"title":"I patch when Reddit starts panicking.","votes":2,"type":"x","order":4,"pct":40,"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
bottom 200