On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 02:21:41AM +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
> Unfortunately the vulnerability described above is not important enough
> to get it fixed via regular security update in Debian stable. It does
> not warrant a DSA.
>
> However it would be nice if this could get fixed via a regular poin
Pierre Chifflier wrote:
>> CVE-2007-5723[0]:
>> | Heap-based buffer overflow in the samp_send function in nuauth/sasl.c
>> | in NuFW before 2.2.7 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of
>> | service via unspecified input on which base64 encoding is performed.
>> | NOTE: some of these details a
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 12:46:03PM +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
> Hi,
> the following CVE (Common Vulnerabilities & Exposures) id was
> published for nufw some time ago.
>
> CVE-2007-5723[0]:
> | Heap-based buffer overflow in the samp_send function in nuauth/sasl.c
> | in NuFW before 2.2.7 allows remo
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 06:38:31AM -0800, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> Could you please schedule a binNMU of aptitude? It needs to be
> rebuilt to match the newly uploaded version of apt.
Umm, nevermind, looks like this happened between when I started
composing this
Hi,
Could you please schedule a binNMU of aptitude? It needs to be
rebuilt to match the newly uploaded version of apt.
Thanks,
Daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:25:23AM +0100, Joey Schulze wrote:
>Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Can we work out what to do with Sarge next please? Right now, we don't
>> have working CDs nor any way to make them. Can we push r8 through with
>> just the small d-i update needed, or should I
Hi,
On Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 11:56:01 +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:56:30AM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 23:51:14 +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> Hi folks,
> >>
> >> Can we work out what to do with Sarge next please? Right now
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:56:30AM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 23:51:14 +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Can we work out what to do with Sarge next please? Right now, we don't
>> have working CDs nor any way to make them. Can we push r8 through w
Security team suggest to redirect this question here.
Thanks.
- Forwarded message from Marco Gaiarin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Marco Gaiarin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:05:33 +0100
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Bug 408440
Organization: La Nostra Famiglia - Polo FVG
Hi,
On Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 23:51:14 +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Can we work out what to do with Sarge next please? Right now, we don't
> have working CDs nor any way to make them. Can we push r8 through with
> just the small d-i update needed, or should I give up on sarge at thi
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Can we work out what to do with Sarge next please? Right now, we don't
> have working CDs nor any way to make them. Can we push r8 through with
> just the small d-i update needed, or should I give up on sarge at this
> point?
Did anybody investigate why Sarge
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It looks like this may not be in the class of library changes that the
> testing migration scripts can figure out for themselves.
>
> Could you hint:
>
> log4cpp/1.0-3 shibboleth-sp/1.3f.dfsg1-6 opensaml/1.1b-3
>
> into testing together? It looks like
12 matches
Mail list logo
