guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 03/03: gnu: borg: Update to 1.0.7.


From: Leo Famulari
Subject: Re: 03/03: gnu: borg: Update to 1.0.7.
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 18:46:58 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.6.2-neo (2016-07-23)

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:42:19PM +0000, Leo Famulari wrote:
> lfam pushed a commit to branch master
> in repository guix.
> 
> commit d760a2fc18c2ba89a183c9071133b8a113279f8a
> Author: Leo Famulari <address@hidden>
> Date:   Mon Aug 8 01:37:11 2016 -0400
> 
>     gnu: borg: Update to 1.0.7.
>     
>     * gnu/packages/backup.scm (borg): Update to 1.0.7.

FYI this update contains a security fix that may require you to change
the flags you pass when invoking Borg on a remote server.

>From the release announcement [0]:

borg serve: fix security issue with remote repository access, #1428 If
you used e.g. --restrict-to-path /path/client1/ (with or without
trailing slash does not make a difference), it acted like a path prefix
match using /path/client1 (note the missing trailing slash) - the code
then also allowed working in e.g. /path/client13 or /path/client1000.

As this could accidentally lead to major security/privacy issues
depending on the pathes you use, the behaviour was changed to be a
strict directory match. That means --restrict-to-path /path/client1
(with or without trailing slash does not make a difference) now uses
/path/client1/ internally (note the trailing slash here!) for matching
and allows precisely that path AND any path below it. So, /path/client1
is allowed, /path/client1/repo1 is allowed, but not /path/client13 or
/path/client1000.

If you willingly used the undocumented (dangerous) previous behaviour,
you may need to rearrange your --restrict-to-path pathes now. We are
sorry if that causes work for you, but we did not want a potentially
dangerous behaviour in the software (not even using a
for-backwards-compat option).

[0]
https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/blob/1.0.7/docs/changes.rst#version-107-2016-08-19



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]