[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability |
Date: |
Thu, 24 Nov 2022 20:38:04 +0200 |
> From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 10:12:31 -0800
> Cc: 59544@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> But would it not be better to rewrite etags.c to not use system(1) at
> all?
That's a possibility, yes. Although I doubt that people are still using
ctags that comes with Emacs (this code fragment runs only in ctags, not in
etags).
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, lux, 2022/11/24
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/11/24
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, Stefan Kangas, 2022/11/24
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, lux, 2022/11/24
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, lux, 2022/11/25
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, Stefan Kangas, 2022/11/25
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, lux, 2022/11/25
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, Stefan Kangas, 2022/11/25
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/11/25
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/11/25
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, lux, 2022/11/25
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, Stefan Kangas, 2022/11/25
- bug#59544: [PATCH] Fixed lib-src/etags.c command execute vulnerability, lux, 2022/11/25