- Original message -
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 00:39:29 +0200 (CEST)
Bencsath Boldizsar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> Do You (We) really surely want to include buggy samba 2.2.3a-12, more
> than half year old in 'testing' release?
> I already know one guy wi
- Original message -
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 00:39:29 +0200 (CEST)
Bencsath Boldizsar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> Do You (We) really surely want to include buggy samba 2.2.3a-12, more
> than half year old in 'testing' release?
> I already know one guy wi
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 12:47:36PM +0200, Boldizsar BENCSATH wrote:
> What about something like this 5-minutes-change?:
>
> Template: samba/security_warning
> Type: boolean
> Default: false
> Description: Warning! Serious Warning!
> This version of samba contains remotely exploitable SERIOUS
> v
What about something like this 5-minutes-change?:
Template: samba/security_warning
Type: boolean
Default: false
Description: Warning! Serious Warning!
This version of samba contains remotely exploitable SERIOUS
vulnerabilities!
If you continue the install You will be definetly target of CRACKING
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 12:39:29AM +0200, Bencsath Boldizsar wrote:
> Do You (We) really surely want to include buggy samba 2.2.3a-12, more than
> half year old in 'testing' release?
> I already know one guy with a 1 week old 'testing' debian hacked through
> samba. (I know, it's -12.3 on security
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 12:47:36PM +0200, Boldizsar BENCSATH wrote:
> What about something like this 5-minutes-change?:
>
> Template: samba/security_warning
> Type: boolean
> Default: false
> Description: Warning! Serious Warning!
> This version of samba contains remotely exploitable SERIOUS
> v
What about something like this 5-minutes-change?:
Template: samba/security_warning
Type: boolean
Default: false
Description: Warning! Serious Warning!
This version of samba contains remotely exploitable SERIOUS
vulnerabilities!
If you continue the install You will be definetly target of CRACKING
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 12:39:29AM +0200, Bencsath Boldizsar wrote:
> Do You (We) really surely want to include buggy samba 2.2.3a-12, more than
> half year old in 'testing' release?
> I already know one guy with a 1 week old 'testing' debian hacked through
> samba. (I know, it's -12.3 on security
Hi,
Do You (We) really surely want to include buggy samba 2.2.3a-12, more than
half year old in 'testing' release?
I already know one guy with a 1 week old 'testing' debian hacked through
samba. (I know, it's -12.3 on security for stable, and samba is not secure at
all, but I think this one needs
Hi,
Do You (We) really surely want to include buggy samba 2.2.3a-12, more than
half year old in 'testing' release?
I already know one guy with a 1 week old 'testing' debian hacked through
samba. (I know, it's -12.3 on security for stable, and samba is not secure at
all, but I think this one needs
10 matches
Mail list logo