On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 09:46:14PM -, Dave McKay wrote:
> Is it really necessary to post the ports security advisories?
> The exploitable programs are not part of the FreeBSD OS, they
> are third party software. I think the proper place for these
> is the Bugtraq mailing list on securityfocus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dave McKay writes:
: Is it really necessary to post the ports security advisories?
Yes.
: The exploitable programs are not part of the FreeBSD OS, they
: are third party software. I think the proper place for these
: is the Bugt
* Dave McKay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000320 14:18] wrote:
> Is it really necessary to post the ports security advisories?
> The exploitable programs are not part of the FreeBSD OS, they
> are third party software. I think the proper place for these
> is the Bugtraq mailing list on securityfocus.com.
Is it necessary to post ports security advisories? YES.
Should they be on this list? You think not. And until a list exists for
security on FreeBSD not related to core OS/packages, this is the best
forum for it, as it relates to FreeBSD Security.
On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, Dave McKay wrote:
> Is i
I think that it is a necessary thing to do, since these programs are
offered in the ports collection, and this is -security after all. It
was nice and convienant to have the advisories posted because I just
happened to have completed installing lynx-ssl from the ports collection
mere hours befor
Dave McKay wrote:
> Is it really necessary to post the ports security advisories?
> The exploitable programs are not part of the FreeBSD OS, they
> are third party software. I think the proper place for these
> is the Bugtraq mailing list on securityfocus.com. Also to add
> to the arguments, mo
6 matches
Mail list logo
