Re: Essential updates?

From: Nifty Hat Mitch (mitch48_at_sbcglobal.net)
Date: 12/30/04

  • Next message: Scott Talbot: "Re: FC3 upgrade breaks iso -> "write to disc" with "cannot open SCSI driver" error"
    Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:27:44 -0800
    To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
    
    

    On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 04:55:32AM +0100, August wrote:
    > On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 17:17 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
    > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 11:12:37PM +0100, August wrote:
    > > > After having installed Fedora Core 3 the exclamation mark shows that
    > > > there are a number of updates available. Is there a way to find out
    > > > which of these updates are essential (security/core functionality)? I'm
    > > > new to Linux and Fedora so I know nothing about most of the included
    > > > packages.
    > >
    > > It's tricky. You can browse the Fedora Announce archives at
    > > <http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/> to get some idea.
    ...
    > Didn't find much info in fedora-announce-list, but thanks anyway. I know
    > that e.g. Windows Update separates essential security updates from other
    > updates. A similar feature in yum or Up2date would be extremely useful.

    Since one mans bug is another mans feature this could be harder
    than you think.

    Windows source is 'closed' we have to trust that essential updates are
    essential. Microsoft has been "marketing" the value of their updates
    and we have no way to research the need, fix or quality. In the past
    some bug fixes appeared to be little more than stack overflow
    protection by recompiling and relinking so a script kiddie tool fails
    (for about a week). The hint for these is that there is another update
    in a sort time period to correct some 'regression' or some other "issue".

    Do watch the fedora-announce-list and also use 'up2date' or 'yum' to
    notice new packages as they become available. Functionality will not
    commonly change without a big number version change. Read some stuff
    on RCS and SCCS to understand version numbering.

    Critical security bugs will commonly have some reference to a common
    security identifier in the announcement. Like this one for gpdf...

       "Update to gpdf 2.8.0, which fixes the CAN-2004-0888 security issue."

    You can also subscribe to the Cert announcement list
    (http://www.cert.org/). Their announcements can tell you how
    'critical' the issue is. N.B. (Note Well) that the folks at RH will
    often back port a bug fix from upstream to insulate ya from feature and
    function changes. Thus a Cert announcement 'fixed in N.n.something'
    may be back ported by RH package folks to a previous version (N-1).

    See also "Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE®)" site
    at http://cve.mitre.org/

    Exceptions to the RH back port strategy exist. They appear to reflect
    the complexity of changes related to the issue and divergence from the
    upstream tree. There is also a lot of overlap in FC2 and FC3
    application packages. So the differences in FC2 and FC3 are more
    bounded than we saw moving from RH9 to FC1 or from FC1 to FC2.

    You can also look at the bugzilla bugs. Those that have some details
    locked from public view will be CRITICAL security issues ;-0. The
    'invisible' stuff is commonly the details of an exploit that should
    not be shared. This is a big clue that you want the fix.

    There is always source. By inspecting the source in concert with the
    bugzilla reports you can learn lots and not need to see the exploit
    details to understand the value of the fix. Often there is no need
    to be a programmer ... look for comments.

    My current strategy is to use yum/up2date to download ALL the new rpm
    files that apply to my system. Then I use rpm tools to look at the
    change log. Example:

       rpm -q --changelog -p ./xpdf-3.00-3.6.i386.rpm | less

    After some research I can decide to update or not.
    So far I have not seen a single update that I did not want to load.
    I have held off a week on some...

    SUMMARY:
    If you use a package keep it current.

    -- 
    	T o m  M i t c h e l l 
    	spam unwanted email.
    	SPAM, good eats, and a trademark of  Hormel Foods.
    -- 
    fedora-list mailing list
    fedora-list@redhat.com
    To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
    

  • Next message: Scott Talbot: "Re: FC3 upgrade breaks iso -> "write to disc" with "cannot open SCSI driver" error"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Firefox 3 hogging 90% CPU, can anything be done about this?
      ... a true bug in FF, Fedora, Mozilla.... ... I have also seen java and javascript error of very stupid types. ... FWIW, the most common ... FF, Fedora, etc... ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: firefox update
      ... Fedora to drop the ball on security fixes... ... I hate to say this, but it's not as unusual as it should be. ... I filed a bug here (cloned from the RHEL4 bug, ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: firefox update
      ... Fedora to drop the ball on security fixes... ... I hate to say this, but it's not as unusual as it should be. ... I filed a bug here (cloned from the RHEL4 bug, ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: users Digest, Vol 84, Issue 33
      ... No need for AV tools on Linux, ... Not able to connect to wifi in Fedora 14 ... Not able to connect to wifi in Fedora 14 ... willing to pay for third-party programs designed to plug the security holes. ...
      (Fedora)
    • Risks Digest 24.91
      ... ACM FORUM ON RISKS TO THE PUBLIC IN COMPUTERS AND RELATED SYSTEMS ... Adi Shamir's bug attack ... Security company e-mail undercuts user education ...
      (comp.risks)