Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

19.11.2012 14:34, Ivan Voras wrote: On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote: (and is GPL btw) Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has proper crypto signing using GPG: http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_Mercurial_hashes_get_calculated

Re: OpenSSL and Heimdal

Robert Simmons wrote: Is there a plan to update OpenSSL to patch for CVE-2012-2131? Also, is the DOS vulnerability in libkrb5 that Heimdal 1.5.2 patches present in Heimdal 1.1 which shipped with 9.0-RELEASE? I'll second this one. 1. Is there any plans on updating openssl and why not? It's get

CVE-2011-1945

Hi all. Recently I started to recheck usability of ssh keys and found that ECDSA keys are already available. I've tried to make one and it points me about key bit length. Reading about this on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliptic_Curve_DSA I also noticed that a timing attack is possible aga

bundled openssl version

I'm just puzzled why we still stick to 0.9.8e. It's almost ancient. Why not 0.9.8f? Doesn't someone need TLS extensions working? -- Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow. ___ freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listi