On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:10:57PM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> On 3/24/22 18:21, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:49:14AM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> >> On 3/24/22 10:11, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:56:29AM -0400, Demi Marie
On 3/24/22 18:21, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:49:14AM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>> On 3/24/22 10:11, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:56:29AM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
As per private discussion with Theo de Raadt, OpenBSD do
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:49:14AM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> On 3/24/22 10:11, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:56:29AM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> >> As per private discussion with Theo de Raadt, OpenBSD does not consider
> >> bugs in its xnf(4) that allow a ba
On 3/24/22 10:11, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:56:29AM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>> As per private discussion with Theo de Raadt, OpenBSD does not consider
>> bugs in its xnf(4) that allow a backend to cause mischief to be security
>> issues. I believe the same applie
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:56:29AM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> As per private discussion with Theo de Raadt, OpenBSD does not consider
> bugs in its xnf(4) that allow a backend to cause mischief to be security
> issues. I believe the same applies to its xbf(4). Should the support
> documen
As per private discussion with Theo de Raadt, OpenBSD does not consider
bugs in its xnf(4) that allow a backend to cause mischief to be security
issues. I believe the same applies to its xbf(4). Should the support
document be updated?
--
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)
Invisible Thi
