On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 10:00:23AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 08:19:24PM +1000, Joshua Goodall wrote:
> >In other words, people are ready to pounce, and that short gap of time
> >after server installation and before installing patched code cannot be
> >considered "safe"
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 08:13:40AM +0200, Christophe Mailhebuau wrote:
> Sir,
>
> I use Woody and i upgrade to Sarge a new stable version. Can you tell
> me, what must i do to configurate a new source in /etc/apt/source.list.
This ist a question for debian-user.
If you have one with lines readin
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:33:29AM -0400, Phillip Hofmeister wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 at 01:58:40AM -0400, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > The security team will continue to support Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 alias
> > woody until May 2006, or if the security support for the next release,
> > codenamed etc
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 10:29:46PM +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
>
> Requiring users to install an important component (which Mozilla is) from
> other sources is a bad idea in this context. I think it should not be the
> way how Debian solves it's problems.
in thecase of mozilla this is not
On Sat, Aug 20, 2005 at 06:15:57PM -0700, Alvin Oga wrote:
> --- i'd like to see various providers of apps ( *.deb ) and upgrades
> be listed on a single page http://updates.debian.org/Updates instead
> of hunting for it in yahoo/google
you know apt-get.org?
Whoever wants to maintain a lis
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 05:38:00PM +0200, Evgeni Golov wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:19:37 +0200
> Peer Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Isn't sending such mails a security risk?
>
> Not only this. It's also quite annoying for the ML readers... I don't
> like this vacancy announcers.
>
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 04:44:13PM +0200, Nicolai Ehemann wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello!
>
> I just (err, over the last 4 or 5 days) created a (hopefully
> standards-compliant) package for the pam_abl PAM module.
>
> The pam_abl module provides a fully config
On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 04:53:45PM -0500, Barry Hawkins wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Alexandr Rappoport wrote:
> > Hi
> > I have a client in Moscow who's looking to purchase two armored vehicles:
> >
> > Merceds G500
> > and
> > Mercedes S500 or S600
> > Ple
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 10:11:44PM +0100, Mario Ohnewald wrote:
> Hello security list!
>
> I would like to secure the harddrive/partitions of linux box.
>
> The whole setup must fulfill the following requirements:
>
> a) it must be able to boot (remotely) without userinput/passphrase
> b) the im
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 11:17:56PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Horst Pflugstaedt:
>
> > I just ask myself why you bother encrypting a filesystem that will be
> > accessible to anyone having access to the machine since it boots without
> > password?
>
> Yo
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:36:16PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 08:06:48PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > * Geoff Crompton:
> > > I'm also wondering if security.debian.org has enough resources for every
> > > single debian box on the planet checking it every X minutes.
> >
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 12:03:59PM +0300, Cataract wrote:
> Hello there.
> i have a problem with the security packages. i can not download them
> from debian.org.
> i use synaptic and after the reload some packages says me fail to
> download them.
> what can i do about it?
What does your sources.l
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 03:37:56PM -0400, Morgan Walker wrote:
>
> Thanks Michelle that worked perfect. Is there an easy variable I could
> throw in there that you know off hand which would include the time
> (MM/DD/) as well?
Apart from the suggestions to use ${ date }, does the date of the
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 06:46:25PM +0100, Thomas Horsten wrote:
> Are you thick or what?
>
the last days it seems to me that those unsubscribe-messages more and
more become a security-problem (health-risk) to the remaining members of this
list...
calm down, please. need some valium? :-)
Greeti
On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 12:45:03PM +0100, Ivo Marino wrote:
> Hello debian-security folks,
>
> I'll post my question on this mailing list in the hope to find some
> interesting pointers and I'm quite sure someone in here has or has
> allready solved my same problems.
>
> Well, I admin different D
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 06:49:17PM -0600, Hanasaki JiJi wrote:
> eterm and feh, on sarge, are reporting invalid archive signatures of
> their dependancies.
>
> I have tried the US and Japan mirrors.
As Jan Niehusman stated about two days ago:
"I assume this is because the 2002 Archive Signing Ke
> Working on running a SMTP server inside the firewall that takes incoming
> SMTP traffic from outside the firewall. The below rules are not
> working. The firewall refuses connections. Any input on what wrong?
>
> Thanks,
>
> internal mailserver = 192.168.1.2
>
>
>
> #$PROG -t nat -A PRE
Hi
On Sun, Apr 13, 2003 at 12:14:32PM +0200, Kay-Michael Voit wrote:
> Hi,
> how do you suggest dealing with firewall logs from a computer which is
> connected through a dialup connection?
> For I receive a new IP every 24h hours, my logs are full of P2P
> connection attempts.
>
> How can I log i
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 03:19:34PM +0200, Emmanuel Lacour wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 12:54:19PM +0200, Juerg Schneider wrote:
> > On Freitag, 18. April 2003 11.16, Horst Pflugstaedt wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > I tried my logging rules with '--log-pref
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 07:43:36PM +0200, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what is the best way to remotely syslog? In
> "RE: HELP, my Debian Server was hacked!" by James Duncan he wrote to
> use "syslog to log locally AND remotely". This is a good idea. But I
> wonder how to make it safe. Let's
On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 01:07:24PM -0500, Mark Edgington wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm not sure whether this idea has been considered or implemented
> anywhere, but I have been thinking about it, and believe it would provide a
> fairly high-level of security for systems which only run a few public
> se
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 05:52:35PM +0200, Peter A. Felvegi wrote:
>
> hello!
>
> i'm about to set up port forwarding on a firewall to be able to reach
> some hosts on the lan from the outside. i wish to use iptables prerouting
> rules. my question is, is there a way to detect the port forwarding
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 11:38:57PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
> Can anyone help me with this firewall.I would like to change
> INTNET="192.168.0.0/24" to more exacts ips like 192.168.0.1,192.168.0.22 and
> so one.
you will either have to rewrite every rule matching 192.168.0.0/24 to
mat
On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 09:58:58PM +0200, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
> Hello,
>
> But nothing gets logged to /var/log/iptabels... It does show in
> dmesg...
> How can I correctly redirect logs with level "debug" to the
> /var/log/iptables file?
perhaps it's not quite the answer you expected... I'm usin
On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 09:27:04AM +0100, mi wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can you tell me what are the default permissions for /etc/group and
> /etc/passwd ?
%--(6)--$ ls -l /etc/passwd
-rw-r--r--1 root root 1276 17. Sep 22:57 /etc/passwd
>
> I restricted them to rw for root only, but s
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 02:11:39PM -0500, Walter Tautz wrote:
> #! /bin/sh
[...]
> which DOES work. I wonder why it's complaining about the line #! /bin/sh
> during the boot messages. Note no such output is in dmesg.
Hi,
ever tried the line
#!/bin/sh
?
all my scripts seem to lack the space.
h
On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 04:12:59PM +0100, Erik Hjelmås wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've spent a few hours searching, what Im looking for is a discussion
> of different security aspects of apt, questions like
> - What are the possible threats in terms of ip spoofing, dns cache
> poisoning? (are there any solu
On Sat, Feb 07, 2004 at 10:38:51AM +0200, E&Erdem wrote:
> Hi,
> I've been using iptables (or i assuming that). But at boot time it gives
> an error: "Aborting iptables load: unknown rulesets "active" ". I
you should first try zo find out, what ruleset iptables tries to load
on boot-time (go, find
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 03:41:13PM +, Dale Amon wrote:
> Yes, as long as his personal beliefs are kept outside
> of Debian. I think a severe warning to keep his politics
> outside of Debian would be sufficient.
I do strongly disagree with his personal thoughts, but I must grant
him the right t
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 02:47:57PM -0800, Jonathan Walther wrote:
> I have never endorsed any particular political point of view while using
> my debian.org address. I feel rather uncomfortable with the way the
> thread has been going; could you clarify whether you meant that I
> actually had done
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 06:46:25PM +0100, Thomas Horsten wrote:
> Are you thick or what?
>
the last days it seems to me that those unsubscribe-messages more and
more become a security-problem (health-risk) to the remaining members of this list...
calm down, please. need some valium? :-)
Greetin
On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 12:45:03PM +0100, Ivo Marino wrote:
> Hello debian-security folks,
>
> I'll post my question on this mailing list in the hope to find some
> interesting pointers and I'm quite sure someone in here has or has
> allready solved my same problems.
>
> Well, I admin different D
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 06:49:17PM -0600, Hanasaki JiJi wrote:
> eterm and feh, on sarge, are reporting invalid archive signatures of
> their dependancies.
>
> I have tried the US and Japan mirrors.
As Jan Niehusman stated about two days ago:
"I assume this is because the 2002 Archive Signing Ke
> Working on running a SMTP server inside the firewall that takes incoming
> SMTP traffic from outside the firewall. The below rules are not
> working. The firewall refuses connections. Any input on what wrong?
>
> Thanks,
>
> internal mailserver = 192.168.1.2
>
>
>
> #$PROG -t nat -A PRE
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 05:52:35PM +0200, Peter A. Felvegi wrote:
>
> hello!
>
> i'm about to set up port forwarding on a firewall to be able to reach
> some hosts on the lan from the outside. i wish to use iptables prerouting
> rules. my question is, is there a way to detect the port forwarding
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 11:38:57PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
> Can anyone help me with this firewall.I would like to change
> INTNET="192.168.0.0/24" to more exacts ips like 192.168.0.1,192.168.0.22 and
> so one.
you will either have to rewrite every rule matching 192.168.0.0/24 to
mat
On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 09:58:58PM +0200, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
> Hello,
>
> But nothing gets logged to /var/log/iptabels... It does show in
> dmesg...
> How can I correctly redirect logs with level "debug" to the
> /var/log/iptables file?
perhaps it's not quite the answer you expected... I'm usin
On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 09:27:04AM +0100, mi wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can you tell me what are the default permissions for /etc/group and
> /etc/passwd ?
%--(6)--$ ls -l /etc/passwd
-rw-r--r--1 root root 1276 17. Sep 22:57 /etc/passwd
>
> I restricted them to rw for root only, but s
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 02:11:39PM -0500, Walter Tautz wrote:
> #! /bin/sh
[...]
> which DOES work. I wonder why it's complaining about the line #! /bin/sh
> during the boot messages. Note no such output is in dmesg.
Hi,
ever tried the line
#!/bin/sh
?
all my scripts seem to lack the space.
h
On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 04:12:59PM +0100, Erik Hjelmås wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've spent a few hours searching, what Im looking for is a discussion
> of different security aspects of apt, questions like
> - What are the possible threats in terms of ip spoofing, dns cache
> poisoning? (are there any solu
On Sat, Feb 07, 2004 at 10:38:51AM +0200, E&Erdem wrote:
> Hi,
> I've been using iptables (or i assuming that). But at boot time it gives
> an error: "Aborting iptables load: unknown rulesets "active" ". I
you should first try zo find out, what ruleset iptables tries to load
on boot-time (go, find
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 03:41:13PM +, Dale Amon wrote:
> Yes, as long as his personal beliefs are kept outside
> of Debian. I think a severe warning to keep his politics
> outside of Debian would be sufficient.
I do strongly disagree with his personal thoughts, but I must grant
him the right t
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 02:47:57PM -0800, Jonathan Walther wrote:
> I have never endorsed any particular political point of view while using
> my debian.org address. I feel rather uncomfortable with the way the
> thread has been going; could you clarify whether you meant that I
> actually had done
On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 10:00:23AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 08:19:24PM +1000, Joshua Goodall wrote:
> >In other words, people are ready to pounce, and that short gap of time
> >after server installation and before installing patched code cannot be
> >considered "safe"
On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 02:39:02PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> anything from its users. If a root exploit is out there, users want
> to know about it. Keeping it a secret is childish.
what would be the alternative?
The security team would have to annonce "there's a possible security
flaw in pa
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 01:43:45PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Horst Pflugstaedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.06.26.2155 +0200]:
> > what would be the alternative?
> > The security team would have to annonce "there's a possible security
> > flaw i
On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 06:39:50AM +0200, Mezig wrote:
> Phillip Hofmeister wrote:
> >You should start by updating any Bayesian filters you have on your
> >machine and then deleting the message. After you have done this you
I always keep my spam archived in a separate mailbox; it's good for
train
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 09:03:57AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.17.0848 +0200]:
> > These are *cipher* blocks, and they are chained only within
> > a *block device* block.
>
> Who guarantees that? If Cipherblock CB_x depends on CB_(x-1), t
48 matches
Mail list logo
