ZeroHour
DashboardNewsCVEsExploitsIncidentsAIBriefAnalyticsEntitiesWatchlistIOCsAsk the feedSourcesFeeds & APIKiosk mode
Vendor

GnuPG

2 mentions in 7 days · 2 in 30 days · 2 total · first seen · last

Search everything

Timeline

Re: Retrospective by 'gpg.fail' authors

oss-security follow-up to a gpg.fail authors' retrospective argues that GnuPG's unmaintained, forgotten code is a security liability and should be deleted.

On the oss-security mailing list, Soatok Dreamseeker responds to a retrospective published by the gpg.fail authors, asking why unmaintained code is retained and stating that forgotten, unmaintained code is a liability and effectively unmaintained by definition. The visible reply addresses Werner Koch and concerns GnuPG code maintenance. No specific CVE, flaw, or exploitation is described in this snippet.

oss-securityupdated · 1h agofirst · 11h agoVulnerability 9 sources1

Re: Retrospective by 'gpg.fail' authors

GnuPG maintainer Werner Koch responds on oss-security to a gpg.fail retrospective covering 2003-era GnuPG code.

On oss-security, GnuPG lead developer Werner Koch replied to a retrospective published by the gpg.fail authors, citing a December 2003 commit in GnuPG's gettime.c affecting asctimestamp and printf format attributes in util.h. The excerpt contains no new CVE identifiers or exploitation evidence, and appears to revisit long-standing historical GnuPG code paths discussed by the retrospective's authors.

oss-securityupdated · 1h agofirst · 13h agoResearch 9 sources

Appears with

organization gpg.fail 1product GnuPG 1product gpg.fail 1
Entities are extracted by the model from each article. Watching an entity keeps it in this browser only (no account); the watchlist page and dashboard alerts use it.