<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "http://bugs.gentoo.org/bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="2.22.7"
          urlbase="http://bugs.gentoo.org/"
          maintainer="bugzilla@gentoo.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>122323</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2006-02-09 17:06 0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>net-wireless/bluez-hcidump - DoS</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2006-02-27 03:02:26 0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>Gentoo Security</product>
          <component>Vulnerabilities</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>All</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Linux</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>FIXED</resolution>
          <bug_file_loc>http://www.secuobs.com/news/05022006-bluetooth9.shtml#english</bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard>B3 [noglsa] DerCorny</status_whiteboard>
          
          <priority>P2</priority>
          <bug_severity>minor</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter>carlo@gentoo.org</reporter>
          <assigned_to>security@gentoo.org</assigned_to>
          <cc>mobile@gentoo.org</cc>

      

      
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>carlo@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-09 17:06:14 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>http://www.secuobs.com/news/05022006-bluetooth9.shtml#english</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>dercorny@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-09 17:13:57 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>hmm well, i&apos;m not really sure if this counts as a security bug, but lets get it fixed anyways: mobile herd, please provide updated ebuild, thank you</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>henrik@brixandersen.dk</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-10 01:46:05 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>I don&apos;t see a patch referenced on that page - nor has the bluez project released a new version.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>liquidx@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-10 03:32:37 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/bluez/hcidump/parser/l2cap.c?r1=1.51&amp;r2=1.52&amp;diff_format=u

only just added a couple of hours ago, i suppose the release will be imminent.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>koon@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-12 10:48:12 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Let&apos;s wait for upstream, this one sounds lame anyway.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>koon@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-21 10:23:02 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>1.30 is out with the fix</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>liquidx@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-21 12:51:42 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>need a little time to test on stable machine before committing.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>liquidx@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-25 10:58:07 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>in portage now. along with stable bump for required bluez-libs and bluez-utils packages.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>dercorny@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-25 11:05:23 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>arches pls stable (it seems like you need to stable bluez-libs and bluez-utils, too - see comment #7) Thanks.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>halcy0n@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-25 12:45:37 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Looks like liquidx already handled x86. :)</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>dertobi123@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-26 11:01:15 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>ppc stable</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>koon@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-26 11:35:56 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Ready for GLSA vote, I tend to vote no</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>liquidx@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-26 12:44:25 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>i think this is pretty minor tbh. i would vote no.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>dercorny@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-27 03:02:26 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Voting no and closing, as always: feel free to reopen.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
      
    </bug>

</bugzilla>