Live data from Hacker News

Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

xbow.com

21–30 of 48 posts

Re: Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

#21
post #3

>What follows is, before anything else, a story. One of those old, well-worn ones. Gag.

[flagged]

Nah I’m just sick of the melodramatic style of writing that seems to pervade all of the major tech blogs and companies now.

These people write like they picture themselves as sages describing the end times to scared children.

Re: Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nah I’m just sick of the melodramatic style of writing that seems to pervade all of the major tech blogs and companies now. These people write like they picture themselves as sages describing the end times to scared children.

And? then keep it for yourself. Why do i have to read your ignorant comment?

You complain about their writing style, no one forced you to read, which you could summarize with an AI if you even cared for the conent but no.

And i read A LOT and i do not come across this writing style at all.

Re: Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

#23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nah I’m just sick of the melodramatic style of writing that seems to pervade all of the major tech blogs and companies now. These people write like they picture themselves as sages describing the end times to scared children.

Yeah, that extremely purple paragraph about how the blog was documenting that liminal period where humans worked together with AI as partners was embarrassing.

Re: Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah I’m just sick of the melodramatic style of writing that seems to pervade all of the major tech blogs and companies now. These people write like they picture themselves as sages describing the end times to scared children.

And? then keep it for yourself. Why do i have to read your ignorant comment? You complain about their writing style, no one forced you to read, which you could summarize with an AI if you even cared for the conent but no. And i read A LOT and i do not come across this writing style at all.

> then keep it for yourself.

Nah.

Re: Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

#25
post #10
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many years ago I used Exim because it was default for my distro of choice back then. But after a few emergency patchings caused by yet another RCE in Exim I learned that switching to Postfix massively improved my sleep quality.

There's a weird folk belief that Exim is a secure 2nd-generation MTA, but it's not; it's a 1st generation MTA, like Sendmail and Smail. The two "secure" 2nd generation MTAs are Postfix and qmail. You shouldn't use those either, really; there is no reason to run a memory-unsafe MTA, or, for that matter, an MTA that isn't backed by a real database.

I run postfix in a receive-only mode to power inbound email processing. I'm very very glad there's no database requirement. It just passes the processing of inbound emails to a filter over stdin, which can do whatever it wants with databases or whatever it needs.

Re: Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

#26
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Calif people found a nice bug in a qmail fork(what I consider usable qmail) some weeks ago.

Right, and that fork is the only version of qmail people still run, and the bug they found was extremely funny given Bernstein's original qmail design (it was, if I remember right, a popen(3) vulnerability --- something that never would have showed up in Bernstein's code, but that's what happens when code gets abandoned, it gets picked up by people who don't really understand it). But it's hard to charge that vulnera…

Actually the original qmail still works fine.

However it has some compatibility problems with modern practices, the most significant being that it does not know TLS.

Having to use TLS is the main reason for running a qmail fork instead of the original.

Re: Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

#27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah I’m just sick of the melodramatic style of writing that seems to pervade all of the major tech blogs and companies now. These people write like they picture themselves as sages describing the end times to scared children.

And? then keep it for yourself. Why do i have to read your ignorant comment? You complain about their writing style, no one forced you to read, which you could summarize with an AI if you even cared for the conent but no. And i read A LOT and i do not come across this writing style at all.

Hey, knock it off. If you disagree with someone, be polite.

Re: Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

#28
post #15

Previously (2023): https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/millions-of-e... Previously (2020): https://www.exim.org/static/doc/security/CVE-2020-qualys/CVE... Previously (2019): https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-1091...

What are you actually trying to say with these links?

Re: Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

#29
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, and that fork is the only version of qmail people still run, and the bug they found was extremely funny given Bernstein's original qmail design (it was, if I remember right, a popen(3) vulnerability --- something that never would have showed up in Bernstein's code, but that's what happens when code gets abandoned, it gets picked up by people who don't really understand it). But it's hard to charge that vulnera…

Actually the original qmail still works fine. However it has some compatibility problems with modern practices, the most significant being that it does not know TLS. Having to use TLS is the main reason for running a qmail fork instead of the original.

"works fine" and "has some compatibility problems" is a little bit of an oxymoron... I understand what you're trying to say, but that does mean it's essentially unusable, despite "working fine".

Re: Dead.Letter (CVE-2026-45185) – How XBOW found an unauthenticated RCE on Exim

#30
I'm sorry but what the f is that timeline? (Condensed to relevant notifications:)

  2025-05-01 - Vulnerability submitted to security@exim.org
  2026-05-08 - Exim maintainers notified the Distros
  2026-05-10 - Restricted Access is provided for Distros
  2026-05-12 - Public release and Coordinated distro Release
4 (2 really) days for distros, and then nothing, zero, zilch, nada between "Coordinated distro Release" and "Public release"?

"I should retrain. Something with wood." is the appropriate German idiom for this, I guess.

Post reply on HN