Actually, I see this differently. This is a classic example of how postgreSQL is viewed by the rest of the world. This argument has been brought up before. It is only the core that differentiates the server from the interfaces. The rest of the world views this as one product.
Dave On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 09:48, Stephan Szabo wrote: > On Sun, 10 Oct 2004, Neil Conway wrote: > > > Gaetano Mendola wrote: > > > Here http://www.sans.org/top20/#u9 > > > are listed postgres vulnerability it's sad see that almost all > > > are related to third part components > > > > "Almost all"? By my count, 12 of the 17 vulnerabilities refer to > > legitimate problems in PostgreSQL, its RPM distribution, or the ODBC driver. > > However, even removing "almost all" from the comment, it's still pretty > sad that a "trusted source for computer security training, certification > and research" would have a >25% miss rate on properly categorizing > vulnerabilities. > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly -- Dave Cramer 519 939 0336 ICQ # 14675561 www.postgresintl.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
