Joey Hess wrote:
> Now that 2.6.12 is finally in testing and work is well underway to
> remove 2.6.8, I think we can switch to tracking security holes in the
> new kernel now. There are several items listed as unfixed in 2.6.8, would
> it be possible for someone to double check if any of these also
On Thu, 2005-09-15 at 11:03 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Joey Hess wrote:
> > Now that 2.6.12 is finally in testing and work is well underway to
> > remove 2.6.8, I think we can switch to tracking security holes in the
> > new kernel now. There are several items listed as unfixed in 2.6.8, wo
On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 12:29:20PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-09-15 at 11:03 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Now that 2.6.12 is finally in testing and work is well underway to
> > > remove 2.6.8, I think we can switch to tracking security holes in the
>
* Andres Salomon:
> How can you tell? The mitre description is absolutely useless. I
> fucking hate this stupid vendor-sec/mitre non-disclosure policy,
In most cases, MITRE does not have access to pre-disclosure
information. They just hand out unique names, and update the database
based on pub
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 02:29:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Andres Salomon:
>
> > How can you tell? The mitre description is absolutely useless. I
> > fucking hate this stupid vendor-sec/mitre non-disclosure policy,
>
> In most cases, MITRE does not have access to pre-disclosure
> infor
5 matches
Mail list logo
