AWARE [SYSTEMS] Imaging expertise for the Delphi developer
AWare Systems, Imaging expertise for the Delphi developer, Home TIFF and LibTiff Mailing List Archive

LibTiff Mailing List

TIFF and LibTiff Mailing List Archive
August 2008

Previous Thread
Next Thread

Previous by Thread
Next by Thread

Previous by Date
Next by Date

Contact

The TIFF Mailing List Homepage
This list is run by Frank Warmerdam
Archive maintained by AWare Systems



Valid HTML 4.01!



Thread

2008.08.29 22:53 "Some security fixes from RHEL", by Even Rouault
2008.08.30 02:08 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Tom Lane
2008.09.01 22:18 "Re: libtiff security", by Dmitry V Levin
2008.08.31 15:17 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Frank Warmerdam
2008.08.31 15:38 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.08.31 21:09 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Rogier Wolff
2008.08.31 21:21 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by <o.druemmer@callassoftware.com>
2008.08.31 21:51 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.08.31 22:08 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Lee Howard
2008.08.31 22:21 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.01 22:10 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Dmitry V Levin
2008.09.03 08:21 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Andrey Kiselev
2008.09.03 15:11 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.03 17:31 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by <ron@debian.org>
2008.09.03 17:48 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.08.31 21:52 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Toby Thain
2008.08.31 22:01 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.08.31 21:59 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Lee Howard
2008.08.31 22:17 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.01 06:29 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Rogier Wolff
2008.09.01 06:53 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Toby Thain
2008.09.01 03:12 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Frank Warmerdam
2008.09.01 15:52 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Lee Howard
2008.09.01 21:33 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Frank Warmerdam
2008.09.03 16:38 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Lee Howard
2008.09.03 17:07 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.03 17:20 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Lee Howard
2008.09.03 18:02 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.03 18:13 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Lee Howard
2008.09.03 18:43 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.03 20:47 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Edward Lam
2008.09.03 21:01 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Lee Howard
2008.09.03 18:32 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Frank Warmerdam
2008.09.03 19:04 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.03 19:32 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by <ron@debian.org>
2008.09.03 21:39 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Lee Howard
2008.09.03 21:59 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Even Rouault
2008.09.03 22:35 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by <ron@debian.org>
2008.09.03 23:31 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.04 07:47 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by <ron@debian.org>
2008.09.04 12:55 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Edward Lam
2008.09.06 01:20 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Jay Berkenbilt
2008.09.04 07:22 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Andrey Kiselev
2008.09.04 08:05 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Tom Lane
2008.09.04 08:52 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Andrey Kiselev
2008.09.04 20:06 "tiffsplit.c broken on Windows in trunk", by Edward Lam
2008.09.04 20:41 "Re: tiffsplit.c broken on Windows in trunk", by Toby Thain
2008.09.04 21:13 "Re: tiffsplit.c broken on Windows in trunk", by Edward Lam
2008.09.05 06:42 "Re: tiffsplit.c broken on Windows in trunk", by Andrey Kiselev
2008.09.03 17:16 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Frank Warmerdam
2008.09.04 07:45 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Andrey Kiselev
2008.09.01 22:30 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Dmitry V Levin
2008.09.03 08:05 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Andrey Kiselev
2008.09.01 05:11 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Tom Lane
2008.09.01 15:30 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Frank Warmerdam
2008.09.01 15:33 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.02 08:13 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Tom Lane
2008.09.02 08:24 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Tom Lane
2008.09.02 12:01 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Kai-uwe Behrmann
2008.09.02 15:49 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by <ron@debian.org>
2008.09.03 08:14 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Andrey Kiselev
2008.09.03 14:07 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Frank Warmerdam
2008.09.03 15:53 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Frank Warmerdam
2008.09.01 16:23 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by <ron@debian.org>
2008.09.01 18:00 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.01 22:04 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Dmitry V Levin
2008.09.01 15:40 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.01 18:19 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Rogier Wolff
2008.09.01 18:45 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.02 15:54 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by <ron@debian.org>
2008.09.02 16:39 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.03 08:03 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Andrey Kiselev

2008.08.31 22:08 "Re: Some security fixes from RHEL", by Lee Howard

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> The programs you list: gqview, GIMP, ImageMagick, and Hylafax are not 
> safe to use when faced with files from malicious users.

I would challenge that nothing is safe when faced with an onslaught of 
malicious-intent.  This is why firewalls are used.  This is why things 
are encrypted and password protected.

However, just because complete security isn't possible, and just because 
system maintainers should design to keep malicious activity away, these 
don't mean that secure coding efforts aren't also important.

> The application I maintain (GraphicsMagick) already has an security 
> exposure of over 1.1 million lines of code.  Modern ImageMagick likely 
> doubles or quadruples this exposure.  Do you care to thoroughly 
> inspect all of this code?

I don't think that a full security audit is being requested.  Rather, I 
think that the original poster is simply asking that these things be 
addressed as they are reported.

I don't consider that unreasonable.

Thanks,

Lee.