Your message dated Sun, 24 Apr 2011 14:06:01 -0400
with message-id <4db46689.3030...@tilapin.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#571092: mention security address on
http://www.debian.org/security/
has caused the Debian Bug report #571092,
regarding mention security address on http://www.debi
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 571092 - security
Bug #571092 [www.debian.org] mention security address on
http://www.debian.org/security/
Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #571092 to the same tags previously set
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please cont
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 09:11:22PM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Gerfried Fuchs [2010-02-23 12:52:42 CET]:
> > * [2010-02-22 18:12:46 CET]:
> > > Do mention secur...@debian.org on http://www.debian.org/security/ , even
> > > if one can dig it out of the contacts pag
* Gerfried Fuchs [2010-02-23 12:52:42 CET]:
> * [2010-02-22 18:12:46 CET]:
> > Do mention secur...@debian.org on http://www.debian.org/security/ , even
> > if one can dig it out of the contacts page.
>
> Please see the "Contact information" at the end of the
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 571092 -security
Bug #571092 [www.debian.org] mention security address on
http://www.debian.org/security/
Removed tag(s) security.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking
whole point is that e.g., police emergency services make sure to not
solely depend on a secondary page for vital contact information...
People in a panic are not going to find it.
Please put in on http://www.debian.org/security/ in addition to
http://www.debian.org/contact lest this sound like a
Hi!
* [2010-02-22 18:12:46 CET]:
> Do mention secur...@debian.org on http://www.debian.org/security/ , even
> if one can dig it out of the contacts page.
Please see the "Contact information" at the end of the page. Though, I
have to admit, that page could need Table of
Do mention secur...@debian.org on http://www.debian.org/security/ , even
if one can dig it out of the contacts page.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.
Hello Thieo (and security team)
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 02:55:19PM +0200, Thiemo Nagel wrote:
> I just noticed that dsa-1753-2 (icedove end-of-life) is not displayed on
> http://www.debian.org/security/, although it is merely 3 days old (from
> July 12)...
You're right, t
Hi,
I just noticed that dsa-1753-2 (icedove end-of-life) is not displayed on
http://www.debian.org/security/, although it is merely 3 days old (from
July 12)...
It looks like none of the dsa-updates are shown (also not eg.
DSA-1829-2). I'd consider this a bad policy, since dsa-update
Your message dated Sun, 4 Jan 2009 14:19:11 +0100
with message-id <20090104131911.gf12...@dedibox.ebzao.info>
and subject line Re: Bug#510660: http://www.debian.org/security/2009 is broken
has caused the Debian Bug report #510660,
regarding http://www.debian.org/security/2009 is broken
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tag 510660 +pending
Bug#510660: http://www.debian.org/security/2009 is broken
There were no tags set.
Tags added: pending
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system adminis
tag 510660 +pending
thanks
On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 09:54:10PM -0500, David Moreno wrote:
> Package: www.debian.org
> Severity: important
>
> Security advisories linked from the front page www.debian.org appear to
> be broken because http://www.debian.org/security/2009 does not ex
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: important
Security advisories linked from the front page www.debian.org appear to
be broken because http://www.debian.org/security/2009 does not exist.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'te
Hi Jens (and all others),
Am Donnerstag, den 15.05.2008, 11:00 +0200 schrieb Jens Seidel:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 08:51:43AM +0200, Michael Schmitt wrote:
> > on #debian.de (IRCNet) some decided to translate
> > http://www.debian.org/security/key-rollover/
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 11:00:17AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 08:51:43AM +0200, Michael Schmitt wrote:
> > on #debian.de (IRCNet) some decided to translate
> > http://www.debian.org/security/key-rollover/ to german, as 3 days
> > without a translatio
Hi,
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 08:51:43AM +0200, Michael Schmitt wrote:
> on #debian.de (IRCNet) some decided to translate
> http://www.debian.org/security/key-rollover/ to german, as 3 days
> without a translation is a shame for such an important issue. Those
Heh? 3 days? The first no
Hi folks,
on #debian.de (IRCNet) some decided to translate
http://www.debian.org/security/key-rollover/ to german, as 3 days
without a translation is a shame for such an important issue. Those
willing to help are already reading some docs about editing /
translating / using cvs.
Any advice what
Your message dated Sat, 30 Jun 2007 13:45:18 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#372721: http://www.debian.org/security/faq#testing wrong
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If t
On Friday 17 November 2006 15:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ohhh. That sucks. We are fighting to move Linux into our shop and when my
> boss, a windoze guy is looking at a "page not found" it gives him ammo to
> keep using microsoft. He say if they can't even maintain there web site
> how can the
.org
Subject
Re: http://www.debian.org/security/2006/dsa-978 Dead links
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 09:06:02AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Every link on this page is dead.
>http://www.debian.org/security/2006/dsa-978
This is expected behaviour, since the package in question received
a
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 09:06:02AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Every link on this page is dead.
> http://www.debian.org/security/2006/dsa-978
This is expected behaviour, since the package in question received
a subsequent security update.
We only keep the most recent v
Every link on this page is dead.
http://www.debian.org/security/2006/dsa-978
Thanks,
Jason,
Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) wrote:
>A: Security updates will migrate into the testing
>distribution via unstable. They are usually uploaded with
>their priority set to high, which will reduce the quarantine time
>to two days. After this period, the packages will migrate into
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi -security,
I would like your help with regards to #372721:
On 06/11/2006 07:09 AM, Simon Waters wrote:
> Package: www.debian.org
> Severity: important
>
>
> http://www.debian.org/security/faq#testing
>
> refers to
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: important
http://www.debian.org/security/faq#testing
refers to http://secure-testing-master.debian.net/
which no longer responds.
Debian announcement
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg6.html
Should be incorporated into the FAQ
Your message dated Sun, 23 Apr 2006 07:37:30 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in CVS
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reo
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña a écrit :
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 06:03:13PM -0500, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
Hi Javier,
I'd like to be sure about which claim you refer to. The current claim is
the one that says that Debian *does* issue fixes for most problems under
48 hours, right? I'm askin
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 06:03:13PM -0500, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> Hi Javier,
> I'd like to be sure about which claim you refer to. The current claim is
> the one that says that Debian *does* issue fixes for most problems under
> 48 hours, right? I'm asking since if I understand right the statis
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña a écrit :
I don't know what that data comes from, but I did produce some statistics a
while back:
http://www.debian.org/News/2004/20040406
http://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2001/12/msg00257.html
I guess that whomever disagrees with the current claim should
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 03:46:23PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> I think the statistic is questionable, so there should be
> verification/substantiation of the statistic, but I don't know
> whether it's right or wrong. I think it's prejudging things to
> delete the first paragraph as suggested.
I don't k
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 19.11.2005 um 07:44 schrieb Filipus Klutiero:
If someone doesn't agree that this is an order of magnitude too
optimistic, I'll point to http://lwn.net/Articles/149976/
I see some problems with theat article, you are referencing here:
1. It has
Filipus Klutiero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> If someone doesn't agree that this is an order of magnitude too
> optimistic, I'll point to http://lwn.net/Articles/149976/
That article is known to contain basic errors. See, for example,
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/09/09
indolence log, by Antho
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: serious
The header of the security page explains Debian's consideration of
security issues and mentions an average security issues response time
under 48 hours.
I am certainly not the first person to notice this, but I have seen
nothing about this issue since mon
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 06:55:22PM +0200, Gabriele Monfardini wrote:
> Hi, excuse me if I've send the message to the wrong place.
>
> In page http://www.debian.org/security/ it is suggested to add the
> following line to sources.list to be in touch with security upd
Hi, excuse me if I've send the message to the wrong place.
In page http://www.debian.org/security/ it is suggested to add the
following line to sources.list to be in touch with security updates
deb http://security.debian.org/ sarge/updates main contrib non-free
This doesn't work pr
Your message dated Sun, 27 Feb 2005 12:05:45 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#296393: http://www.debian.org/security/2005/dsa-674 is not
updated. Now DSA-674-3 is here.
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim th
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: normal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Yesterday, DSA 674-3 for mailman was released but web page
about dsa-674 is not updated, still dsa-674-"2".
Please update it.
- --
Regards,
Hideki Yamane henrich @ samba.gr.jp/iijmio-mail.jp
* Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña schrieb am 12.01.05 um 15:28 Uhr:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 09:14:45AM +0100, Jens Seidel wrote:
> > Any idea how to proceed with such broken links on security pages?
> > Link to another location, maybe snapshot.debian.org, ...? Or better add
> > a note that the sec
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 09:14:45AM +0100, Jens Seidel wrote:
> Any idea how to proceed with such broken links on security pages?
> Link to another location, maybe snapshot.debian.org, ...? Or better add
> a note that the security update is outdated?
Better add a "header" like this: "This security
David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 12.01.05 06:07:52:
> On Wed, 2005-01-12 at 01:21 +0100, Sebastian Bork wrote:
> > On the page there are several links to files with "wody" in their
> > version. None of them works, as it has to be "woody". Since this
> > is a security advisory, I re
On Wed, 2005-01-12 at 01:21 +0100, Sebastian Bork wrote:
> On the page there are several links to files with "wody" in their
> version. None of them works, as it has to be "woody". Since this
> is a security advisory, I recommend quick fixing.
I haven't found any 'wody' string in dsa-548.{data,wml
On the page there are several links to files with "wody" in their
version. None of them works, as it has to be "woody". Since this
is a security advisory, I recommend quick fixing.
Thank you!
--
Sebastian Bork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._
acking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: http://www.debian.org/security/2004/ is missing references to revised
advisories like DSA 431-2
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Reportbug-Version: 2.56
X-GPG
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 11:27:18AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > > At the bottom of the page for the DSA, there is a link to the
> > > revised advisory. Joey, shouldn't the header information be
> > > updated as well?
> >
> > At the bottom of the page are these two lin
Matt Kraai wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 01:21:03PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > http://www.debian.org/security/2004 only lists the initial advisory
> > (DSA ???-1) but not revisions like DSA 431-2
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/debian-security-a
Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > At the bottom of the page for the DSA, there is a link to the
> > revised advisory. Joey, shouldn't the header information be
> > updated as well?
>
> At the bottom of the page are these two links:
> | MD5 checksums of the listed files are available in the original
> |
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 08:13:32AM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 01:21:03PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > http://www.debian.org/security/2004 only lists the initial advisory
> > (DSA ???-1) but not revisions like DSA 431-2
> > http://lists.debia
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 01:21:03PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> http://www.debian.org/security/2004 only lists the initial advisory
> (DSA ???-1) but not revisions like DSA 431-2
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/debian-security-announce-2004/msg00087.html
At the bott
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: normal
http://www.debian.org/security/2004 only lists the initial advisory
(DSA ???-1) but not revisions like DSA 431-2
http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/debian-security-announce-2004/msg00087.html
cu andreas
On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 09:02:13AM -0700, Dan Wilder wrote:
> In
>
> http://www.debian.org/security/2003/dsa-382
>
> should the sentence
>
> DSA-383-3: This advisory is an addition to the earlier DSA-382-1
> and DSA-382-2 advisories: Solar Designer found four more bug
In
http://www.debian.org/security/2003/dsa-382
should the sentence
DSA-383-3: This advisory is an addition to the earlier DSA-382-1
and DSA-382-2 advisories: Solar Designer found four more bugs
in OpenSSH that may be exploitable.
actually say
DSA-382-3: This advisory is an addition to the
Your message dated Wed, 8 Jan 2003 10:59:56 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#175708: typo in german translation of
http://www.debian.org/security/faq#handling
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the probl
Your message dated Wed, 8 Jan 2003 10:54:33 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#175706: typo in german translation of
http://www.debian.org/security/faq#care
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem ha
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: minor
Hello,
there is a typo in the german version of
http://www.debian.org/security/faq#care
F: Was soll ich bei einem Sicherheitspaket in einem einem meiner Pakete tun?
should be:
F: Was soll ich bei einem Sicherheitsproblem in einem einem meiner
Pakete
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: minor
Hello,
there is a typo in the german version of
http://www.debian.org/security/faq#handling
... Behegung ...
should be:
... Behebung ...
thanks for working on Debian!
Frank Loeffler
* Kurt Seifried <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-11 02:24]:
> MD5 checksums of the listed files are available in the original advisory.
>
> Sends you to the MHonArc advisory at
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/debian-security-announce-20
> 02/msg00083.html. It should point to:
>
> h
MD5 checksums of the listed files are available in the original advisory.
Sends you to the MHonArc advisory at
http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/debian-security-announce-20
02/msg00083.html. It should point to:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/debian-security-announ
* Noèl Köthe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-06-10 12:14]:
> shouldn't we change the "potato" in the apt line on this
> page to "stable", so we don't have to change it every release?
Personally don't think so, read my other reply to the same issue. Only
thing I'd think that would be good to sugguest is
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 12:14:05PM +0200, Noel Koethe wrote:
> shouldn't we change the "potato" in the apt line on this
> page to "stable", so we don't have to change it every release?
Nice theory. Unfortunately, the archive path tends to change. :)
--
Mike Stone
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [
Hello,
shouldn't we change the "potato" in the apt line on this
page to "stable", so we don't have to change it every release?
--
Noèl Köthe
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Previously peter karlsson wrote:
> you do not only remove unsecure packages, but also packages that have
> been superseded by newer versions, so perhaps that sentence should be
> slightly rephrased?
Feel free to come up with a better wording. I couldn't come up with one
I liked better and was hopi
On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 08:03:30PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> Since I just removed a bunch of old packages from security.debian.org
> I suspect this may be a useful addition to the faq:
>
> Q: I am trying to download a package that is listed in one of the
>security advisories and I ge
Wichert Akkerman:
> Since I just removed a bunch of old packages from security.debian.org
> I suspect this may be a useful addition to the faq:
Looks god, but:
>This prevent people from installing a package from
>security.debian.org that we know is not secure.
you do not only remove uns
Since I just removed a bunch of old packages from security.debian.org
I suspect this may be a useful addition to the faq:
Q: I am trying to download a package that is listed in one of the
security advisories and I get a file not found error.
A: If a newer fix is available for a package we rem
On Fre, 16 Nov 2001, Rick Luddy wrote:
Hello Rick,
> In http://www.debian.org/security/2001/dsa-086 the line
>
> Though packages ... we are taking the unusal step of releasing updated
> ^^
> should be
>
> Though packages ... we a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In http://www.debian.org/security/2001/dsa-086 the line
Though packages ... we are taking the unusal step of releasing updated
^^
should be
Though packages ... we are taking the unusual step of releasing
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 10:45:29PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > shows DSA-075-1 which is from Tue, 14 Aug 2001, i.e. quite old already,
> > but can not be seen at the main page.
>
> Fixed now, lousy webmaster were not doing their jobs...
>
> PS: *hide*
Only if you're referring to yourself as
Bernhard R. Link wrote:
>
> I hope this is the right list, please correct me in personal email if I'm
> wrong.
>
> http://www.debian.org/security/ shows only till DSA-074
>
> but
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/debian-security-announce-2001/
I hope this is the right list, please correct me in personal email if I'm wrong.
http://www.debian.org/security/ shows only till DSA-074
but
http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/debian-security-announce-2001/
shows DSA-075-1 which is from Tue, 14 Aug 2001, i.e. quite old al
Quoting Tollef Fog Heen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> * Robert van der Meulen
> | I'm in the security team, but my key is not in
> | http://www.debian.org/security/keys.txt; which means people have to go
> | trough some trouble to get it after i release an advisory.
> Updated in CVS
Your message dated 17 Aug 2001 13:50:33 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#108905: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' is not in
http://www.debian.org/security/keys.txt
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the proble
Package: www.debian.org
Version: N/A; reported 2001-08-16
Severity: normal
Hi,
I'm in the security team, but my key is not in
http://www.debian.org/security/keys.txt; which means people have to go
trough some trouble to get it after i release an advisory.
Greets,
Robert
-- S
Michael Klemme wrote:
> Hallo!
>
> Are you teh Debian Webmasters?
Yep.
> It was quite difficult to find out about it.
>
> The German Version of http://www.debian.org/security/ still has the old
> APT soutrce line
> deb http://security.debian.org/ slink updates
>
Hallo!
Are you teh Debian Webmasters?
It was quite difficult to find out about it.
The German Version of http://www.debian.org/security/ still has the old
APT soutrce line
deb http://security.debian.org/ slink updates
It shhould be
deb http://security.debian.org/ potato/updates main
Your message dated Mon, 28 Aug 2000 13:33:52 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#70395: http://www.debian.org/security/ - (finnish
translation)
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt wi
On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 10:24:34AM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
> package: www.debian.org
> version: n/a;
>
> Hi,
>
> the next row seems to have a typo...
>
> deb http://security.debian.org/ potato/updates mian contrib non-free
>
Fixed in CVS. The
package: www.debian.org
version: n/a;
Hi,
the next row seems to have a typo...
deb http://security.debian.org/ potato/updates mian contrib non-free
Anyway, generally You're doing a great job.
--
Riku Voipio
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
09-862 60764
78 matches
Mail list logo
