Bug 136415 – app-text/acroread: <7.0.8 unspecified vulnerability ?

• Status: RESOLVED INVALID
• Product: Gentoo Security

[Description Raphael Marichez (Falco) (RETIRED) 2006-06-11 07:59:54 UTC]

http://www.adobe.com/support/techdocs/327817.html says :

"Security: several security bug fixes have been made, including one considered critical."

for the 7.0.8 update

how should we consider this ?
In doubt, printing team, could you introduce acroread-7.0.8 into portage of possible ?

[Comment 1 Stefan Schweizer (RETIRED) 2006-06-17 19:43:58 UTC]

I added a masked 7.0.8 ebuild because it does not have all localization yet.

[Comment 2 Raphael Marichez (Falco) (RETIRED) 2006-06-18 04:31:11 UTC]

(In reply to comment #1)
> I added a masked 7.0.8 ebuild because it does not have all localization yet.
> 

I suppose we can't stabilize this version.

Back to [upstream] status in order to wait for a valid upstream version.

[Comment 3 Stefan Cornelius (RETIRED) 2006-07-24 09:01:44 UTC]

ok, we waited long enough. i dont care a lot about localization, imho is security more important. what do you think?

[Comment 4 Wolf Giesen (RETIRED) 2006-07-24 21:29:16 UTC]

Yes, let's shove it out, preferrably with an enotice describing security overrules understandability .-)

[Comment 5 Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2006-07-29 05:41:34 UTC]

I agree.
genstef/printing : please unmask it or advise.

[Comment 6 Stefan Schweizer (RETIRED) 2006-07-29 07:49:36 UTC]

adobe has released some language tarballs and I have unmasked the new version -  go ahead :)

[Comment 7 Stefan Cornelius (RETIRED) 2006-07-29 08:43:59 UTC]

amd64 and x86, please test and stable 7.0.8, thanks

[Comment 8 Joshua Jackson (RETIRED) 2006-07-30 20:19:25 UTC]

*thumbs up* It works like it should ^.^;

[Comment 9 Simon Stelling (RETIRED) 2006-07-31 04:38:45 UTC]

amd64 done

[Comment 10 Thierry Carrez (RETIRED) 2006-07-31 13:42:35 UTC]

Voting yes, one unknown critical.

[Comment 11 Matthias Geerdsen (RETIRED) 2006-07-31 14:00:53 UTC]

voting yes too (one critical, acroread is widely used)

[Comment 12 Wolf Giesen (RETIRED) 2006-07-31 22:06:10 UTC]

yes

[Comment 13 Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen (RETIRED) 2006-08-01 00:46:39 UTC]

okokOK:-)

[Comment 14 Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen (RETIRED) 2006-08-02 09:06:41 UTC]

According to RH CVE-2006-3093 does not affect the Linux version, so I suggest we close this one as INVALID.

Comments?

[Comment 15 Wolf Giesen (RETIRED) 2006-08-02 09:34:43 UTC]

Hm, SuSE still released new packages. Do they know something the others don't?

http://lists.suse.com/archive/suse-security-announce/2006-Jul/0004.html

[Comment 16 Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen (RETIRED) 2006-08-02 09:52:14 UTC]

No, they didn't know what others know now.

[Comment 17 Wolf Giesen (RETIRED) 2006-08-02 10:54:51 UTC]

Great, I downloaded that bloat and guess what, there's no changelog/release note inside. Probably to save bandwidth. Ha, ha. Just gotta love them.

[Comment 18 Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen (RETIRED) 2006-08-02 23:46:24 UTC]

Closing as INVALID.

Feel free to reopen if you disagree.

Sorry for the noise.