Sam wrote:
That's odd. I've subscribed to Bugtraq for years, and they are usually
right on the spot with announcements liek this. .80 hasn't been current
for what, two months?
In this case I don't think it's BugTraq that's slow, I think it's
Conectiva. The CVE already lists advisories for Gento
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Rob MacGregor wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 22:26:18 +, Brian Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> Announcement at
> http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/392097/2005-02-28/2005-03-06/0.
>
> The CVE referenced in it
> (http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 22:26:18 +, Brian Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You have not provided enough information for us to determine that, at
> the least the old and new versions of the Connectiva ClamAV packages are
> needed.
Announcement at
http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/392097
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Brian Morrison wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:24:54 -0600 (CST) in
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sam
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So what's the poop on this? .83 fix this issue?
>
> You have not provided enough information for us to determine that, at
> the least the old and new
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:24:54 -0600 (CST) in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sam
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So what's the poop on this? .83 fix this issue?
You have not provided enough information for us to determine that, at
the least the old and new versions of the Connectiva ClamAV packages are
needed.
--
So what's the poop on this? .83 fix this issue?
Thanks for a great product too! You guys rule!
Sam
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
-
--
CONECTIVA LINUX SECURITY ANNOUNCEMENT
-
---
