<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic wu-ftp in Operating System - HP-UX</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/wu-ftp/m-p/3500542#M562565</link>
    <description>I am working at a customer running wu-ftp compiled from source, 2.6.0. And running TCB on hp-ux 11.0.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Everything works just fine but there are vulnerabilities in wu-ftp that must be patched per audit requirements.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Problem: as far as I can tell, vulnerabilities exist in:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;1. the latest version of wu-ftp (2.6.1) that I can download from hp, and besides it supposedly doesn't work (for anonymous ftp) with TCB enabled.  The customer is (I think) using anonymous ftp.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;2. the latest 2.6.2 build at the porting archive.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;3. even the source code download from the &lt;A href="http://www.wu-ftpd.org" target="_blank"&gt;www.wu-ftpd.org&lt;/A&gt; (but there is a patch to the source code available.)  Building from source wouldn't be my first choice, but is (probably) possible.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I would have to do put some effort in figuring out what the config files are doing with "groups" if I switch to another ftpd, so I'd prefer not doing that.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Hopefully I'm missing some obvious easy fix, so... does anyone have a suggestion for the best - ok, make that easiest - solution to closing the wu-ftp vulnerabilties on these systems?  I'm trying very hard not to break anything as this is a production environment, with very limited possibilities for experimentation once any changes are made.  Thanks for any suggestions.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Paul</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2005 17:44:01 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Paul Tibbitts</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2005-03-08T17:44:01Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>wu-ftp</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/wu-ftp/m-p/3500542#M562565</link>
      <description>I am working at a customer running wu-ftp compiled from source, 2.6.0. And running TCB on hp-ux 11.0.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Everything works just fine but there are vulnerabilities in wu-ftp that must be patched per audit requirements.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Problem: as far as I can tell, vulnerabilities exist in:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;1. the latest version of wu-ftp (2.6.1) that I can download from hp, and besides it supposedly doesn't work (for anonymous ftp) with TCB enabled.  The customer is (I think) using anonymous ftp.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;2. the latest 2.6.2 build at the porting archive.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;3. even the source code download from the &lt;A href="http://www.wu-ftpd.org" target="_blank"&gt;www.wu-ftpd.org&lt;/A&gt; (but there is a patch to the source code available.)  Building from source wouldn't be my first choice, but is (probably) possible.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I would have to do put some effort in figuring out what the config files are doing with "groups" if I switch to another ftpd, so I'd prefer not doing that.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Hopefully I'm missing some obvious easy fix, so... does anyone have a suggestion for the best - ok, make that easiest - solution to closing the wu-ftp vulnerabilties on these systems?  I'm trying very hard not to break anything as this is a production environment, with very limited possibilities for experimentation once any changes are made.  Thanks for any suggestions.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Paul</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2005 17:44:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/wu-ftp/m-p/3500542#M562565</guid>
      <dc:creator>Paul Tibbitts</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-03-08T17:44:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: wu-ftp</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/wu-ftp/m-p/3500543#M562566</link>
      <description>Best to stick with the binaries.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The latest install from HP depots is a good idea.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Since I installed 2.6.1, three years ago, there were several security warnings. HP released binaries which I manually installed. &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;You need to check with the response center to make sure you have all the necessary fixes.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The ability to block root ftp was not in the 2.6.1 release. That was annoying and almost nailed me on an audit.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;SEP</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:25:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/wu-ftp/m-p/3500543#M562566</guid>
      <dc:creator>Steven E. Protter</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-03-08T22:25:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: wu-ftp</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/wu-ftp/m-p/3500544#M562567</link>
      <description>Thanks.  It sounds like all the latest vulnerabilities are not fixed in the latest available binary from the response center.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Paul</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:14:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/wu-ftp/m-p/3500544#M562567</guid>
      <dc:creator>Paul Tibbitts</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-03-10T09:14:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

