Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 81118 ftp.debian.org
Bug#81118: base: Wishlist: High security base system (or separate add-on package)
Bug reassigned from package `base' to `ftp.debian.org'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you
reassign 81118 ftp.debian.org
thanks
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:57:52PM +0100, Arthur Korn wrote:
> > Joey Hess schrieb:
> > > If it is a daemon that binds to a port, and it doesn't have "secure" in its
> > > name or "encryption" in its description, i
Anthony Towns wrote:
> If you want minimal, just install the "important" packages. If you
> want _really_ minimal, just install the "required" packages.
Before telling people to do this could you please fix all the wrong
priorities in testing and unstable? [ Or at least the ones regarding
standar
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:57:52PM +0100, Arthur Korn wrote:
> Joey Hess schrieb:
> > If it is a daemon that binds to a port, and it doesn't have "secure" in its
> > name or "encryption" in its description, it's gotta be insecure.
> Debians minimal system (what's called 'standard') is to fat.
Tha
Arthur Korn wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Joey Hess schrieb:
> > If it is a daemon that binds to a port, and it doesn't have "secure" in its
> > name or "encryption" in its description, it's gotta be insecure.
>
> Debians minimal system (what's called 'standard') is to fat.
> Regardless of how secure it is
Hi
Joey Hess schrieb:
> If it is a daemon that binds to a port, and it doesn't have "secure" in its
> name or "encryption" in its description, it's gotta be insecure.
Debians minimal system (what's called 'standard') is to fat.
Regardless of how secure it is, many boxes just don't need the
portm
Anthony Towns wrote:
> Oh, and for reference, portmap hasn't has a security update forever
> while I've been maintaining it. Heck, there don't seem to have been any
> changes to portmap since 1997. But hey, feel free to make the traditional
> baseless accusations of insecurity, whatever.
If it is
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:14:30PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
> "Standard" (and important) are basically defined as a "free, character
> mode Unix system". Probably, this implies having telnet and telnetd
> available, and being able to use NFS and so on.
what about rsh, rlogin, rcp and such?
On 01-01-04 Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:09:34PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > > don't be so sure, i recently saw someone on -devel get yelled at for
> > > saying portmap is not secure.
> > Well, I would suggest, that those people who yell me for this, either do
> > a aud
On 01-01-04 Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:40:46AM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > On 01-01-04 Ethan Benson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 07:50:58PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > > > > apt-get remove telnetd
> > > > Well, why do we have telnet enabled after installati
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:09:34PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > don't be so sure, i recently saw someone on -devel get yelled at for
> > saying portmap is not secure.
> Well, I would suggest, that those people who yell me for this, either do
> a audit of portmap and present it on -devel or s
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:40:46AM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> On 01-01-04 Ethan Benson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 07:50:58PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > > > apt-get remove telnetd
> > > Well, why do we have telnet enabled after installation?
> > because telnetd is priority standa
On 01-01-04 Ethan Benson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 11:37:08AM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > Well, I'm not sure if downgrading would be a good idea, but changing the
> > postinst-script should be easier to do as this would part of it would be
> > very generic and could be used in other sc
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 11:37:08AM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
>
> Well, I'm not sure if downgrading would be a good idea, but changing the
> postinst-script should be easier to do as this would part of it would be
> very generic and could be used in other scripts via cut&paste too.
perhaps, bu
On 01-01-04 Ethan Benson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:40:46AM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > Hm, what about changing the postinst of telnetd so, that I ask the admin
> > who installs debian or the package, if he really wants to activate
> > telnetd or not?
> either that or downgrade tel
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:40:46AM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
>
> Hm, what about changing the postinst of telnetd so, that I ask the admin
> who installs debian or the package, if he really wants to activate
> telnetd or not?
either that or downgrade telnetd to another priority.
> > nfsd and
On 01-01-04 Ethan Benson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 07:50:58PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > > apt-get remove telnetd
> >
> > Well, why do we have telnet enabled after installation? This is a bit
> > security hole and I think this service should be disabled and only be
> > enabled by the
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 07:50:58PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
>
> > apt-get remove telnetd
>
> Well, why do we have telnet enabled after installation? This is a bit
> security hole and I think this service should be disabled and only be
> enabled by the admin.
because telnetd is priority stan
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001 10:58:37 +0100, Michael Bramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 10:15:43AM +0200, era eriksson wrote:
>> The stock base system comes with various "traditional security holes"
>> enabled. It would be nice (and probably very constructive) to have a
>> brief
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 10:15:43AM +0200, era eriksson wrote:
> Package: base
> Version: 20010103
> Severity: wishlist
>
> The stock base system comes with various "traditional security holes"
> enabled. It would be nice (and probably very constructive) to have a
> brief and simple procedure for
Package: base
Version: 20010103
Severity: wishlist
The stock base system comes with various "traditional security holes"
enabled. It would be nice (and probably very constructive) to have a
brief and simple procedure for how to reconfigure the system so as to
run a reasonably tight ship.
Off the
21 matches
Mail list logo
