On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 12:18:22 -0600, Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Simons wrote:
> > Miguel Filipe writes:
> >
> >  > I came "sounding like an ass"? Why is that?
> >
> > Because you criticized the Gentoo project. It works like
> > this: You bring up a security problem. In the replies you
> > get, though, your actual point is flat out dismissed or
> > never addressed at all. Instead, you and your behavior will
> > be discussed in a very provoking manner. Once you have been
> > thoroughly annoyed and insulted, you become defensive and
> > lose focus of what you were trying to say in the first
> > place! Thus, the discussion drifts away from the security
> > problem.
> 
> Peter, please don't start your rant again.
> 
> >  > Because I talked about a LOCAL ROOT EXPLOIT ..that isn't
> >  > mentioned in the GENTOO SECURITY ML because its in the
> >  > bugs repository?
> >
> > The advantage of dealing with security problems _only_ in
> > the bug tracking system is that practically nobody follows
> > the bug tracking system -- whereas lots of people read the
> > mailing list. Thus, there is less transparency, which means
> > more freedom for the Gentoo core team to deal with security
> > problems in a way that doesn't interfere with internal
> > politics (read: egos).
> 
> The reason you haven't seen an email about it is because security
> advisories get sent to gentoo-announce. It was decided a few years ago
> to move those emails from here to there because there were a lot more
> people on that list. The other reason you haven't seen any email about
> this from us is because we go through a process to make sure all the
> ebuilds are updated before we release an announcement (which is
> documented on our site [1] ). Its not being ignored one bit, its just
> not very visible unless you follow bugs.

You send the _security_ advisories to _announce_ because more people
are subscribed to it?
You only announce problems _after_ a fix is made??? Did it occur to
any of you that people might want to disable vulnerable sevices or
even *gasp* help produce fixes for the problems?
We have to watch bugs.gentoo to get a total picture?

I couldn't agree more with Peter, this ML is about as usefull as a
bicycle is to a fish.

> 
> >  > If issues like a LOCAL ROOT EXPLOIT aren't mentioned
> >  > here, WHY THE HELL does this ML exist?
> >
> > As it happens, I have a concrete proposal how to make this
> > list more useful! How about having the bug tracking system
> > forward all new security-related entries to this mailing
> > list automatically? This policy would (a) increase
> > transparency and (b) help finding volunteers from the
> > community who care enough about a problem to be willing to
> > dedicate time to fixing it. Thus: less work for the Gentoo
> > core team, more security for everybody.
> 
> Add a watch on the bugs site like was previously mentioned. Perhaps that
> should be better documented so people like him can follow things like that.
> 
> >  > Where is explained that those who want to follow security
> >  > issues that may affect thier systems should track
> >  > bugs.gentoo.org?
> >
> > I'd very much like to see an answer to this question. The
> > page <http://security.gentoo.org/> doesn't seem to say
> > anything about.
> 
> See above. If this needs to be added, make a bug about it.
> 
> [1] http://www.gentoo.org/security/en/vulnerability-policy.xml
> 
> -Lance
> 
> 
> --
> [email protected] mailing list
> 
> 
-- 

Why are the pretty ones always insane?
-- J.G. Thirlwell

--
[email protected] mailing list

Reply via email to