5 added 40 characters in body
source | link

Considering that RedHat and other major teams in business are conducting an audit in bash and have uncovered a few other vulnerabilities besides -7169 (-7186 and -7187), is it sensible to link /bin/sh to another shell?


Both -7186 and -7187 were found by one researcher - Florian Weimer - in just a few days (RedHat has been working on Shellshock since September 14), independently discovered by Todd Sabin from VMWare. Just how many more lurk there is anyone's guess. By the way, I'm not talking about permanent replacement, just suspension till things clear up.

Considering that RedHat and other major teams in business are conducting an audit in bash and have uncovered a few other vulnerabilities besides -7169 (-7186 and -7187), is it sensible to link /bin/sh to another shell?


Both -7186 and -7187 were found by one researcher - Florian Weimer - in just a few days (RedHat has been working on Shellshock since September 14). Just how many more lurk there is anyone's guess. By the way, I'm not talking about permanent replacement, just suspension till things clear up.

Considering that RedHat and other major teams in business are conducting an audit in bash and have uncovered a few other vulnerabilities besides -7169 (-7186 and -7187), is it sensible to link /bin/sh to another shell?


Both -7186 and -7187 were found by one researcher - Florian Weimer - in just a few days (RedHat has been working on Shellshock since September 14), independently discovered by Todd Sabin from VMWare. Just how many more lurk there is anyone's guess. By the way, I'm not talking about permanent replacement, just suspension till things clear up.

4 Weidner -> Weimer
source | link

Considering that RedHat and other major teams in business are conducting an audit in bash and have uncovered a few other vulnerabilities besides -7169 (-7186 and -7187), is it sensible to link /bin/sh to another shell?


Both -7186 and -7187 were found by one researcher - Florian WeidnerWeimer - in just a few days (RedHat has been working on Shellshock since September 14). Just how many more lurk there is anyone's guess. By the way, I'm not talking about permanent replacement, just suspension till things clear up.

Considering that RedHat and other major teams in business are conducting an audit in bash and have uncovered a few other vulnerabilities besides -7169 (-7186 and -7187), is it sensible to link /bin/sh to another shell?


Both -7186 and -7187 were found by one researcher - Florian Weidner - in just a few days (RedHat has been working on Shellshock since September 14). Just how many more lurk there is anyone's guess. By the way, I'm not talking about permanent replacement, just suspension till things clear up.

Considering that RedHat and other major teams in business are conducting an audit in bash and have uncovered a few other vulnerabilities besides -7169 (-7186 and -7187), is it sensible to link /bin/sh to another shell?


Both -7186 and -7187 were found by one researcher - Florian Weimer - in just a few days (RedHat has been working on Shellshock since September 14). Just how many more lurk there is anyone's guess. By the way, I'm not talking about permanent replacement, just suspension till things clear up.

3 added 220 characters in body
source | link

Considering that RedHat and other major teams in business are conducting an audit in bash and have uncovered a few other vulnerabilities besides -7169 (-7186 and -7187), is it sensible to link /bin/sh to another shell?


Both -7186 and -7187 were found by one researcher - Florian Weidner - in just a few days (RedHat has been working on Shellshock since September 14). Just how many more lurk there is anyone's guess. By the way, I'm not talking about permanent replacement, just suspension till things clear up.

Considering that RedHat and other major teams in business are conducting an audit in bash and have uncovered a few other vulnerabilities besides -7169 (-7186 and -7187), is it sensible to link /bin/sh to another shell?


Both -7186 and -7187 were found by one researcher - Florian Weidner - in just a few days (RedHat has been working on Shellshock since September 14). Just how many more lurk there is anyone's guess.

Considering that RedHat and other major teams in business are conducting an audit in bash and have uncovered a few other vulnerabilities besides -7169 (-7186 and -7187), is it sensible to link /bin/sh to another shell?


Both -7186 and -7187 were found by one researcher - Florian Weidner - in just a few days (RedHat has been working on Shellshock since September 14). Just how many more lurk there is anyone's guess. By the way, I'm not talking about permanent replacement, just suspension till things clear up.

2 added 220 characters in body
source | link
    Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackSecurity/status/515797662600544256
1
source | link