Re: Iperf 2.0.2 released
Regarding the mention of a "buffer overflow", this is _not_ a known
security issue; here was the problem, as stated in Hans Blom's email to
the list:
" However, there still is an issue that could also be found in previous
Iperf versions. At Linux "unsigned long" appears to be used for the
"max_size_t", resulting in an Integer overflow at very high bandwidths: "
So, I guess one could stage an attack by giving you a great deal of
bandwidth, and forcing you to use it, but otherwise there should be no
cause for concern.
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Eli Dart wrote:
> ...
> What buffer overflow? Does this have security implications? I may
> just be asleep, but I don't remember seeing anything about this....
>
> --eli
> ...
--
John S. Estabrook
jestabro --at-- ncsa.uiuc.edu
jestabro --at-- dast.nlanr.net