Re: LDAP search without credetials

ot;higher" or "lower" default security, but a trade-off between two problems: either having default access for everyone to data you may not want them to have access to, or having to proliferate a high-value password all over the place. choose your poison :) regards robert -- Robe

Re: LDAP search without credetials

h an anonymous bind, in our case user ids, names, emails etc. If you do log in with real credentials, you get more information. So just saying: locking down your LDAP may not make things more secure, because you now need to proliferate actual credentials all over the place... regards

Re: UNS: Debian 4.0 Upgrade Path

ted to point out that the fact that a direct upgrade from N to N+2 isn't supported doesn't mean that it wouldn't be desirable to get the length of the security support to that length. cu robert -- Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: UNS: Debian 4.0 Upgrade Path

y support for lenny is very early in that diagram, whether that is true is questionable. cu robert [0] http://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases -- Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: first A record of security.debian.org extremely slow

ay > of doing that off the top of my head, though) it is an odd way, but it is simple and it works because apt will use the other records if the blocked one fails (i do the same). messing with your /etc/hosts isn't much better... cu robert -- Robert Lemmen

Re: security.debian.org extremely slow

om machines with otherwise good network connection (colocated). and at least one other person that i can't remember had the same problems too. it does indeed look as if tartini is a bit flaky... cu robert -- Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com signature

Re: Addressing the recent zlib issue

On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 03:59:43PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > rsync (probably version 1.1) i'll take care of this one cu robert -- Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian Security Support in Place

july 2002, i think if it is supported until may 2006(one year after it got replaced with a new stable version) that's quite a long timeframe and a very good reason for promoting debian! cu robert -- Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Bad press related to (missing) Debian security - action

is that exactly this does not happen: i want security fixes for the versions that i have installed, not newer versions. and that's also were things get complicated... cu robert -- Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Darn skiddies (ssh login attempts)

: http://blog.andrew.net.au/2005/02/17 cu robert -- Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Compromised system - still ok?

y slow, so you wouldn't want to do them on the whole content (signature would be the same order of size as teh content too..). so you always sign a message digest. you would want to choose a better one than md5 though (sha1 for example), but that's a trivial change cu r

debian security support history

: - was there really no 2.1r1 to 2.1r3? the first point release i can see there is r4... - was there any security support for releases before slink? - any other comments? thanks a lot robert [0] http://www.semistable.com/files/releases.gif [1] http://www.debian.org/News/ -- Robert Lemmen