Hi everyone!
I just want to know what happened with the CVE-2005-3573[1],
particularly in stable/sarge.
Thanks for all your help.
Luciano
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/339095
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
El vie, 20-01-2006 a las 12:30 +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane escribió:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 03:33:21PM -0300, Luciano Bello wrote:
>
> > I just want to know what happened with the CVE-2005-3573[1],
> > particularly in stable/sarge.
>
> We (mailman Debian package ma
On Sunday 13 December 2015 19.11.48 Luciano Bello wrote:
>
-
> Debian Security Advisory DSA-3416-1 secur...@debian.org
> https://www.debian.org/security/ Luciano Bello
&
On Tuesday 12 April 2016 19.21.57 Bjoern Nyjorden wrote:
> Imagemagick version 8:6.7.7.10-5+deb7u4 is STILL NOT AVAILABLE at the
> http://security.debian.org/ server.
>
> I'm very concerned about this. Will the updated version be uploaded soon?
It should be now. It appears in https://tracker.d
On Sunday, 27 November 2016 04:09:30 EST Luciano Bello wrote:
> CVE ID : CVE-2016-7799 CVE-2016-7906 CVE-2016-8677
The list of fixed CVEs fixed in the DSA was incomplete. It should be:
CVE-2016-7799 CVE-2016-7906 CVE-2016-8677 CVE-2016-8862 CVE-2016-9556
CVE-2016-9559
The website
Hello,
I'm searching for a co-mentor for the GSoC project "Patch Porting
System" [0]. The project was presented in DebConf 2017 as a PoC [1] and
the GSoC submission is trying to stabilize some key components and
create a small community around them.
A co-mentor is needed to act as a backup men
DSA 2509-1 corrigendum:
Where says:
For the testing distribution (wheezy), this problem has been fixed in version
2.10.4-1.1.
Should says:
For the testing distribution (wheezy), this problem has been fixed in
version 2.10.6-1.
The fixed version for wheezy will be there tomorrow, via unstable.
Hi there,
I have been trying to fix the multiple security issues that binutils has
pending[1] for wheezy/stable. It have been quite complicated and the patch
affects many elements of the code. I would like to avoid regression as much as
possible.
Please, take a look to it [2] (compiled for amd
On Tuesday 23 December 2014 13.30.22 Alexander Cherepanov wrote:
> CVEs were assigned only to a small number of issues so far and I'm not
> sure it's worth it to fix them without fixing others.
That's true, but we have to draw the line somewhere. The bigger the patches to
backport, the easier to
9 matches
Mail list logo