On Wednesday 03 February 2010 12:56:57 Robert Howard wrote:
> suppose my problem with all the Arch security/insecurity talk is that it
> assumes that Arch users are not more than capable of reading lists and
> discovering bug and holes in software that we use daily. I don't think
> there has ever
I suppose my problem with all the Arch security/insecurity talk is that it
assumes that Arch users are not more than capable of reading lists and
discovering bug and holes in software that we use daily. I don't think there
has ever been an issue with an Arch package that wasn't fixed as soon as
ups
Le Mon, 1 Feb 2010 22:21:03 +0100,
Heiko Baums a écrit :
> If a security bug is found it should be filed to and fixed by upstream
> anyway.
This is true, except sometimes upstream patching can take a while and
it would be a good idea to warn users about the problem in the meantime
so that they c
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Ananda Samaddar
wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Feb 2010 14:14:18 -0600
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Daenyth Blank
>>
>> Don't forget: everyone is interested in "starting discussions" or
>> "planning" or "drawing up plans", but when it comes to t
Am Mon, 1 Feb 2010 15:17:51 -0500
schrieb Carlos Williams :
> How does Arch Linux far behind in security as compared to Debian.
> Perhaps I caught this conversation late but I would like to know what
> makes Debian better in aspects of security -vs- Arch? Can anyone
> please explain?
Debian keeps
On 1 February 2010 06:27, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
> While I was using Fedora, the first thing after installing the OS was to
> disable SELinux :D
I thought to myself I might have a look at some SELinux guides on the
web, seeing as it could be a useful tool. I was rather put off that
the first
On Mon, 1 Feb 2010 14:14:18 -0600
Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Daenyth Blank
>
> Don't forget: everyone is interested in "starting discussions" or
> "planning" or "drawing up plans", but when it comes to the actual work
> well, then the original initiators get disinter
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 15:17, Carlos Williams wrote:
> How does Arch Linux far behind in security as compared to Debian.
> Perhaps I caught this conversation late but I would like to know what
> makes Debian better in aspects of security -vs- Arch? Can anyone
> please explain?
>
Mainly package si
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Daenyth Blank wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:01, Ananda Samaddar
>> wrote:
>>> I really like Arch. I switched about a year ago after being a Debian
>>> user for nine years. There is something that trou
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Daenyth Blank wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:01, Ananda Samaddar
> wrote:
>> I really like Arch. I switched about a year ago after being a Debian
>> user for nine years. There is something that troubles me though about
>> Arch. Its lack of security focus.
>
On 02/01/2010 11:01 AM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim wrote:
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Nicky726 wrote:
Hm,
would be nice. :-) I ve been digging into SELinux and Arch lately, and yes
some more official support would be nice. If there is something being organized,
I'd gladly help, at least in this SEL
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Nicky726 wrote:
> Hm,
>
> would be nice. :-) I ve been digging into SELinux and Arch lately, and yes
> some more official support would be nice. If there is something being
> organized,
> I'd gladly help, at least in this SELinux area.
>
security isnt about SELin
On 01/31/2010 09:18 PM, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
> On 01/31/2010 08:31 PM, Ananda Samaddar wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>
> Key signing is not required for us I think. Because Arch people are
> the first to release package updates. It is tested properly and is
> given in .tar.gz archives. Even if a byte i
On 01/31/2010 08:31 PM, Ananda Samaddar wrote:
I really like Arch. I switched about a year ago after being a Debian
user for nine years. There is something that troubles me though about
Arch. Its lack of security focus. By this I mean there is no
consistent way that security issues are dealt w
Le Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:01:15 +,
Ananda Samaddar a écrit :
> After some discussion we should be able to reach a consensus and
> start giving security issues the priority they deserve.
Maybe this is the problem: some people (including me) might think that
perfect security is not a priority. Th
Hm,
would be nice. :-) I ve been digging into SELinux and Arch lately, and yes
some more official support would be nice. If there is something being
organized,
I'd gladly help, at least in this SELinux area.
Regards,
Ondrej Vadinsky
--
Don`t it always seem to go
That you don`t know what you`
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:01, Ananda Samaddar
wrote:
> I really like Arch. I switched about a year ago after being a Debian
> user for nine years. There is something that troubles me though about
> Arch. Its lack of security focus.
>
Basically this and everything related to it comes down to ma
I really like Arch. I switched about a year ago after being a Debian
user for nine years. There is something that troubles me though about
Arch. Its lack of security focus. By this I mean there is no
consistent way that security issues are dealt with. There was a
proposal for 'The Arch Linux Se
18 matches
Mail list logo
