Security-Issue: Where is the new version 1.13 ?
Posted: 24 Dec 2011 05:27
Hi
first: I don't wanna piss anybody off
... but I have a simple question concerning the security of the vlc-Player:
A few days ago I read some news that there was a security-hole in vlc (http://www.videolan.org/security/sa1108.html) that was exploitable thru videos on websites if you use the vlc-Browser-Plugin...
When I tried to Download the new version I found out that there is still 1.1.11 offered at the front page of the vlc-Project-website...
Sorry, like I said before, I don't wanna piss anybody off, who develops software for free, but why does it take so long to offer the new version... Its just a build job... or am I wrong...?
I like vlc and have recommend it for non-nerds to use it, because its a neat piece of software...
but why are you still distributing the old vulnerable version although the patch for this problem already exists? (http://download.videolan.org/pub/videol ... .13/win32/)...
Or Am i wrong here and Im missing sth...??? Why isn't the build-job started immediately after the patch exists?
first: I don't wanna piss anybody off
... but I have a simple question concerning the security of the vlc-Player:
A few days ago I read some news that there was a security-hole in vlc (http://www.videolan.org/security/sa1108.html) that was exploitable thru videos on websites if you use the vlc-Browser-Plugin...
When I tried to Download the new version I found out that there is still 1.1.11 offered at the front page of the vlc-Project-website...
Sorry, like I said before, I don't wanna piss anybody off, who develops software for free, but why does it take so long to offer the new version... Its just a build job... or am I wrong...?
I like vlc and have recommend it for non-nerds to use it, because its a neat piece of software...
but why are you still distributing the old vulnerable version although the patch for this problem already exists? (http://download.videolan.org/pub/videol ... .13/win32/)...
Or Am i wrong here and Im missing sth...??? Why isn't the build-job started immediately after the patch exists?