Go bGm TjVJW
Hey Debian-security AgNoJ
Hey Debian-security kbMUuCeJh .
bhOMbvR Debian-security
I have recently begun using 802.1q vlan's and channel bonding with my cisco
switches and debian application servers to provide redundancy and bandwitdh
aggregation across several internet connections with no bgp. Where I used to
have 2 or 3 ethernet interfaces on different networks for each
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 09:28:32AM -0600, John Repass wrote:
My question is this: Can I treat say bond0.433 and bond0.434 as completely
seperate interfaces for iptables purposes? What I mean to say is, I know I
can do it, can I do it as safely as the old fashioned method of configuring
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I can confirm the same problem on one server I have running
Filename: pool/updates/main/m/man-db/man-db_2.3.20-18.woody.3_i386.deb
I think it might have started after another update (possibly the perl update).
Not sure. Any info you may have on the matter would be greatly appreciated.
Todd
from debian-private:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 02:51:55AM +, Robert Millan wrote:
Hi there,
As you might have already heard, a root compromise, which presumably has been
there for two months, was recently detected in {ftp,alpha}.gnu.org
(read http://ftp.gnu.org/MISSING-FILES.README for
[ Moving to debian-security ]
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 12:35:44PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 12:51, Robert Millan wrote:
2) Any unsigned sources in ftp.gnu.org could have been trojaned during
the March-July period, and most of GNU packages have their corresponding
[ Moving to debian-security ]
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 12:35:44PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 12:51, Robert Millan wrote:
2) Any unsigned sources in ftp.gnu.org could have been trojaned during
the March-July period, and most of GNU packages have their corresponding
9 matches
Mail list logo
