On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Jordon Bedwell wrote:
> That's almost jokingly ironic.
That's to be expected, the list is mostly noise and in no way required
for them to be able to do their job.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 8:55 PM, adrelanos wrote:
>
>> What are your plans if you ever have reason to believe that the Debian
>> archive signing key has been compromised?
>
> It is unlikely that the people responsible for that are reading this
>
On 10/30/2013 10:49 AM, Norbert Kiszka wrote:
> Dnia 2013-10-30, śro o godzinie 11:34 -0200, Djones Boni pisze:
>> On 30-10-2013 11:05, Celejar wrote:
>>> You're snipping crucial context; my comment above was in response to
>>> this:
For apt-get a self-signed certificate could be used which co
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 8:55 PM, adrelanos wrote:
> What are your plans if you ever have reason to believe that the Debian
> archive signing key has been compromised?
It is unlikely that the people responsible for that are reading this
list. I suggest you contact them (DSA, ftpteam) directly.
--
What are your plans if you ever have reason to believe that the Debian
archive signing key has been compromised?
http://ftp-master.debian.org/keys.html says:
> Key Revocation Procedure
> A revokation certificate for the archive key is produced at the time
of the creation of an archive key. The p
5 matches
Mail list logo
