Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!nic.csu.net!csun!kithrup!sef
From: sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: SECURITY BUG IN INTERACTIVE UNIX SYSV386
Keywords: BAD BUG
Message-ID: <1991Feb16.033616.28943@kithrup.COM>
Date: 16 Feb 91 03:36:16 GMT
References: <1991Feb12.052336.29639@motcad.portal.com> <15126@uudell.dell.com> <15185@uudell.dell.com>
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
Lines: 17

In article <15185@uudell.dell.com> jrh@mustang.dell.com (James Howard) writes:
>So, now for the facts, right?   The following machine configurations were
>tested, and did not display the bug.  The test was done by compiling the
>source as posted here on USENET.  

I tested the program on kithrup, once with the fpu recognized, once with the
fpu disable (booting with 'ignorefpu' at the boot: prompt).  It failed both
times, as I'd expected.  (Hey, I was being paranoid before I posted, what
can I say? 8-))  This was under SCO UNIX 3.2v2.

Hmm... I think I shall ask someone about 386BSD 8-).

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "I made the universe, but please don't blame me for it;
sef@kithrup.COM  |  I had a bellyache at the time."
-----------------+           -- The Turtle (Stephen King, _It_)
Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.