Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[ADSM\-L\]\s+Fix\s+for\s+privilege\s+escalation\s+bug\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[ADSM\-L\]\s+Fix\s+for\s+privilege\s+escalation\s+bug\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [ADSM-L] Fix for privilege escalation bug (score: 1): Author: Thomas Denier <Thomas.Denier AT JEFFERSON DOT EDU>; Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 15:56:24 +0000; We have a considerable number of Linux TSM clients running on 32 bit x86 processors and currently using either 6.2.2.0 or 6.2.4.0 client code. These client code levels have the privilege escalation b; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-03/msg00061.html (11,877 bytes)
2. Re: [ADSM-L] Fix for privilege escalation bug (score: 1): Author: Skylar Thompson <skylar2 AT U.WASHINGTON DOT EDU>; Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:03:55 -0700; I think that is the case, but you can workaround the bug by deleting or removing access to the dsmtca binary. -- -- Skylar Thompson (skylar2 AT u.washington DOT edu) -- Genome Sciences Department, Sy; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-03/msg00062.html (12,538 bytes)
3. Re: [ADSM-L] Fix for privilege escalation bug (score: 1): Author: Bjoern Rackoll <backup.rackoll AT RRZ.UNI-HAMBURG DOT DE>; Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 17:09:53 +0100; Hi Thomas! We also have some 32bit Linux clients and are using the 6.2.5.4 code on these machine with no issues up to now. In fact, doing so was recommended to us by IBM support. Regards, -- Björn Ra; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-03/msg00064.html (11,912 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]