A 32-year-old bug walks into a Telnet server

(labs.watchtowr.com)

36 points | by paimapi 1 day ago

9 comments

  • collinfunk 1 hour ago
    As the person who wrote the fix for this issue (and not the original code), I will just mention that I find this paragraph makes the author sound incredibly entitled:

        Shamefully, the inetutils project hasn’t actually released a fixed version of their software (at least at the time of publishing).
    
    The bug was reported on a public mailing list, which is sadly common nowadays [1]. After my workday, during which I was not able to review the report, I wrote a script to confirm the bug was real, since I was seeing way too many slop reports at the time. Then I sent a patch before going to bed [2]. A third party then graciously shared the patch on oss-security [3], which all distributions follow. There is no need to make a new release, which is harder for the distributions than simply applying a small patch.

    Perhaps I am just unlucky in my interactions, but I feel like this entitlement is too common among software security people. Note that I see zero return in spending time working on Inetutils, and I find other projects I work on more interesting.

    [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-inetutils/2026-03/msg... [2] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-inetutils/2026-03/msg... [3] https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/03/12/4

    • x______________ 1 hour ago
      The not-so-silent minority hanging out on HN know that the true heroes are those who take the time and put in the effort, and then put even more effort to reply and post about it here.

      Thanks to all of our heroes, op included.

    • taftster 1 hour ago
      It's an unfortunate statement. And it does feel like it discredits you and the heroic efforts of those like you.

      But this is probably forgiven as just sensationalism in writing, which is all too common. Not to excuse the author, but these types of writeups tend to drift into name calling and finger pointing a little too soon.

      "Shamefully" is definitely the wrong word here, for sure.

      • JoshTriplett 8 minutes ago
        > But this is probably forgiven as just sensationalism in writing

        Why should we forgive sensationalism in writing at all?

  • khrbtxyz 44 minutes ago
    A surprisingly long article for a one-line fix the authors didn’t send.
    • Skywalker13 20 minutes ago
      Since AI is redacting, a lot of articles are long and boring to read with a lot of useless details.
  • krautsauer 1 hour ago
    Needs a (March 19) (I know HN only does this for years, but this being about vulnerabilities…)
  • mitxela 31 minutes ago
    FYI all signalling is in-band signalling
  • notimetorelax 1 hour ago
    I really dislike articles that blow out of proportion the technical details. TLDR; bounds checking was missing leading to potential memory corruption.
  • sjpb 39 minutes ago
    If you're going to rip off xkcd pictures, I feel it'd be polite at least credit and/or link the original.
  • jeffbee 1 hour ago
    RISC was not a distant dream in 1994 LMAO.