X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<482E2836.49FBC5B1@dessent.net>
Date:	Fri, 16 May 2008 17:35:02 -0700
From:	Brian Dessent <brian AT dessent DOT net>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	unsolicited <unsolicited AT swiz DOT ca>
CC:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: SSH / SSL vulnerable?
References:	<482DD839 DOT 4060905 AT swiz DOT ca>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

unsolicited wrote:

> Is cygwin's ssh / ssl vulnerable, as per the recent debian / buntu's
> security alert?

The openssl problem was caused by a Debian local patch that was
installed to quell valgrind warnings.  Valgrind supports only
linux+glibc, so there would be no reason to apply such a patch to a
Cygwin openssl, which is built OOTB from upstream sources with no
changes.

Brian

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -