Security

Download

security@lists.almalinux.org

October 2023

2 participants
2 discussions

Re: Fwd: Question regarding ALSA-2023:5244
by Adam Stackhouse 31 Oct '23

31 Oct '23

Hi, Thanks that's great to know, good job it planned reboots then. Thanks for your time on this and have a good day On Mon, 30 Oct 2023, 16:14 Andrew Lukoshko, <alukoshko(a)almalinux.org> wrote: > Hello. > > Our kernel version 4.18.0-477.27.1.el8_8 was released without > CVE-2023-3390 and CVE-2023-20593 fixes, that's why additional kernel > release version 4.18.0-477.27.2.el8_8 was necessary. > So our kernel 4.18.0-477.27.2.el8_8 corresponds to RHEL's > 4.18.0-477.27.1.el8_8. > > -- > Best Regards, > > Andrew Lukoshko | AlmaLinux OS Architect > > On Sunday, Oct 22, 2023 at 6:52 PM, Jonathan Wright < > jonathan(a)almalinux.org> wrote: > Copying @Andrew Lukoshko <alukoshko(a)almalinux.org> to make sure he sees > this. > > On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 11:05 AM Adam Stackhouse <adstak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Wondering if this is a better place to ask this question regarding a >> kernel release for ALSA-2023:5244 >> >> Original question should be below as a forwarded message to save writing >> it out again. >> >> Thanks in advance for any help regarding this and If you require anymore >> info feel free to reach out. >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> From: Adam Stackhouse <adstak(a)gmail.com> >> Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023, 10:13 >> Subject: Question regarding ALSA-2023:5244 >> To: <packager(a)almalinux.org> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> I have noticed a slight difference with the kernel release for Alma >> compared to rocky and rhel for example. I was writing to ask if this is an >> expected diverge because of the recent centos repo issues or a mistake from >> the auto generated errata and updateinfo for the package. >> >> The question is on the errata page for --> >> https://errata.almalinux.org/8/ALSA-2023-5244.html >> >> The required kernel version is 4.18.0-477.27.2.el8_8 and this is >> reflected in the updateinfo in the repo however looking to "upstream" and >> alteratives like rocky you can see the same security advisory id generated >> from rhel is showing the required kernel version to be >> --> 4.18.0-477.27.1.el8_8 >> >> So as you can see I am just wondering if this is a mistake in the >> generated output for Alma or an expected diverge as the difference to me is >> rebooting thousands of servers or not to apply security updates :D >> >> Sources for security advisories from rocky and rhel: >> >> Rhel --> https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2023:5244 >> Rocky --> https://errata.rockylinux.org/RLSA-2023:5244 >> >> Any questions let me know >> _______________________________________________ >> Security mailing list -- security(a)lists.almalinux.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to security-leave(a)lists.almalinux.org >> > > > -- > Jonathan Wright > AlmaLinux Foundation > Mattermost: chat <https://chat.almalinux.org/almalinux/messages/@jonathan> > >

1 0

Fwd: Question regarding ALSA-2023:5244
by Adam Stackhouse 22 Oct '23

22 Oct '23

Hi, Wondering if this is a better place to ask this question regarding a kernel release for ALSA-2023:5244 Original question should be below as a forwarded message to save writing it out again. Thanks in advance for any help regarding this and If you require anymore info feel free to reach out. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Adam Stackhouse <adstak(a)gmail.com> Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023, 10:13 Subject: Question regarding ALSA-2023:5244 To: <packager(a)almalinux.org> Hi, I have noticed a slight difference with the kernel release for Alma compared to rocky and rhel for example. I was writing to ask if this is an expected diverge because of the recent centos repo issues or a mistake from the auto generated errata and updateinfo for the package. The question is on the errata page for --> https://errata.almalinux.org/8/ALSA-2023-5244.html The required kernel version is 4.18.0-477.27.2.el8_8 and this is reflected in the updateinfo in the repo however looking to "upstream" and alteratives like rocky you can see the same security advisory id generated from rhel is showing the required kernel version to be --> 4.18.0-477.27.1.el8_8 So as you can see I am just wondering if this is a mistake in the generated output for Alma or an expected diverge as the difference to me is rebooting thousands of servers or not to apply security updates :D Sources for security advisories from rocky and rhel: Rhel --> https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2023:5244 Rocky --> https://errata.rockylinux.org/RLSA-2023:5244 Any questions let me know

2 1