Fix expansions for RFC 822 addresses having comments in local-part and/or domain...
[exim.git] / doc / doc-txt / cve-2016-9663
index ae85a73cbc5a137c617394a30a68bb019a56488f..ffff3db526269b0c3862d9b40e896192e10931ac 100644 (file)
@@ -60,8 +60,8 @@ Fix
 
 Install a fixed Exim version:
 
 
 Install a fixed Exim version:
 
-    4.88        (available soon)
-    4.87.1      (available soon)
+    4.88
+    4.87.1
 
 If you can't install one of the above versions, ask your package
 maintainer for a version containing the backported fix. On request and
 
 If you can't install one of the above versions, ask your package
 maintainer for a version containing the backported fix. On request and
@@ -69,6 +69,11 @@ depending on our resources we will support you in backporting the fix.
 (Please note, that Exim project officially doesn't support versions
 prior the current stable version.)
 
 (Please note, that Exim project officially doesn't support versions
 prior the current stable version.)
 
+If you think that you MIGHT be affected, we HIGHLY recommend to create
+a new set of DKIM keys and fade out the previous DKIM key soon to make
+sure that a possibly leaked DKIM key can not be misused in the future.
+
+
 Workaround
 ==========
 
 Workaround
 ==========
 
@@ -84,3 +89,7 @@ You can check if you where affected already. The mainlog entries look like this:
 
 2016-12-17 09:44:33 10HmaX-0005vi-00 ** baduser@test.ex R=client T=send_to_server H=ip4.ip4.ip4.ip4 [ip4.ip4.ip4.ip4]: PRDR error after -----BEGIN RSA PRIVATE KEY-----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\nfKQax6vhiMq+0qIiEwLA1wavyLVKZ7Mfag+/4NTcDUVC\n-----END RSA PRIVATE KEY-----\n: 550 PRDR R=<baduser@test.ex> refusal
 
 
 2016-12-17 09:44:33 10HmaX-0005vi-00 ** baduser@test.ex R=client T=send_to_server H=ip4.ip4.ip4.ip4 [ip4.ip4.ip4.ip4]: PRDR error after -----BEGIN RSA PRIVATE KEY-----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\nfKQax6vhiMq+0qIiEwLA1wavyLVKZ7Mfag+/4NTcDUVC\n-----END RSA PRIVATE KEY-----\n: 550 PRDR R=<baduser@test.ex> refusal
 
+Even if there is no evidence in the existing log files, that a DKIM key
+leakage happened this might have happened in the past, log files might
+have been deleted already but a key leak could have ended up via mail
+bounce in a user mail box