I doubt it's been taken care of yet seeing as how Apache hasn't released an
official version yet that fixes this bug (although I hear its fixed in the CVS
code).
On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 05:44:11PM -0700, Timm Gleason wrote:
> I looked through the changelogs and the changelog.Debian files, but
>
I looked through the changelogs and the changelog.Debian files, but
couldn't conclusively decide if the current vulnerability in Apache has
been taken care of or not. Anyone else know?
http://httpd.apache.org/info/security_bulletin_20020617.txt
Monday, June 17 2002
--
Hello,
As you know, chkrootkit master site is : ftp.pangeia.com.br
Let's have a look :
pollux:~# ftp ftp.pangeia.com.br
Connected to ftp.pangeia.com.br.
220 spliff FTP server (PFTP 0.13) ready.
Name (ftp.pangeia.com.br:root): ftp
331 Guest login ok, send ident as password.
Password:
230 Guest lo
--- Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun,
Jun 16, 2002 at 11:33:34PM +0200, Robert van
> der Meulen wrote:
>
> > Quoting Nathan E Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > Right; when you bought it, it was "dark". Once
> you put light into it,
> > > it's no longer dark. If someone thinks "
--- Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun,
Jun 16, 2002 at 11:33:34PM +0200, Robert van
> der Meulen wrote:
>
> > Quoting Nathan E Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > Right; when you bought it, it was "dark". Once
> you put light into it,
> > > it's no longer dark. If someone thinks "
On Sun, Jun 16, 2002 at 11:33:34PM +0200, Robert van der Meulen wrote:
> Quoting Nathan E Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Right; when you bought it, it was "dark". Once you put light into it,
> > it's no longer dark. If someone thinks "dark" denotes who owns the
> > tranceivers, well, they're de
This one time, Loic Le Loarer wrote:
> Le Monday 10 June 2002 ? 10:23:23 -0700, Anne Carasik a ?crit:
> > Check the man page for what ciphers SSH2 accepts. I usually leave it on
> > Blowfish because it's secure and it's the fastest cipher. AES sucks
> > because it's dog slow, and it doesn't buy you
/OFFTOPIC
Wet copper usually meant that there was a DC loading on the circuit
90volt if I remember correctly
The idea was that if there was a marginal connection somwhere in the wiring
this loading would cause a spark thereby welding the join back up
I've been told that most circuits today are dr
Jeff Bonner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> 3) Any reason you *wouldn't* want to use compression in SSH?
Yes, where your bandwidth is cheaper/faster than your CPU. For example on a
100Mb/s or faster LAN it is rarely useful to compress.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a sub
10 matches
Mail list logo
