Is there any reason why there is no OpenSSH 3.1
package for debian available yet?
is the "OpenSSH_3.0.2p1" version avaiable in the
testing/unstable tree already patched
against the "March 7, 2002: Off-by-one error in the channel code" security
hole?
thanks
Peter
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 14:34, Peter Lieven wrote:
Is there any reason why there is no OpenSSH 3.1 package for debian available yet?
is the OpenSSH_3.0.2p1 version avaiable in the testing/unstable tree already
patched
against the March 7, 2002: Off-by-one error in the channel code security
Peter Lieven [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit:
is the OpenSSH_3.0.2p1 version avaiable in the testing/unstable tree already
patched
against the March 7, 2002: Off-by-one error in the channel code security hole?
yes.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] : Junichi Uekawa
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:53:16PM +0200, Mark Janssen wrote:
Debian usually patches the (security) bug, without going straight to the
new upstream release, but only upgrading the package number
That's only the case with stable. In unstable, there is no reason not
to go straight to the new
Hi,
Just wanted to make it clear the the email i sent about Neomail was
purely to let other people know about a program that i thought was worth
mentioning, it had nothing to do with Ernie Miller and was not intended
to be SPAM.
Im sorry if i have caused you problems Ernie this is the last
I have a situation where my superiors are leaning heavily on me to make
life more convenient for them by having total availability of data from
a group of machines. They basically want to log into any one machine
within this group with the same password, and be able to access any
disks they
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 09:02:56PM -0500, Rob VanFleet wrote:
I work for several University astronomers who basically want something
like what they're used to at other places: a pure sun shop, running
NIS and NFS.
Two choices for authentication (passwd + shadow):
(1) Kerberos
Never used
Rob VanFleet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They basically want to log into any one machine within this group
with the same password, and be able to access any disks they choose
from any pariticular machine (within this group).
An AFS-based setup is used at many places to great effect, especially
hi ya
why not do the following ???
make one machine be your primary NIS server...
- all passwds defined there...
all other machines uses the NIS server for passwd authentication
and turn on ssh logins ( ~/.shosts ) w/o checking passwd
use automounter for
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 07:39:43PM -0700, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
Two choices for authentication (passwd + shadow):
(1) Kerberos
Never used it. Can't advise you.
I've looked at Kerberos, but at least a cursory glance at leaves the
impressions that it is ridiculously complicated to set up
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:04:01PM -0500, Rob VanFleet wrote:
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 07:39:43PM -0700, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
Two choices for authentication (passwd + shadow):
(1) Kerberos
Never used it. Can't advise you.
I've looked at Kerberos, but at least a cursory glance at
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
I suspect that if all your boxes are running Debian that your life will
be made easier by all the Debian kerberos packages.
This is an interesting thread, and this comment just gave me an idea.
What if you use FreeS/WAN (or really, any sort of IPsec)?
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 09:22:12PM -0700, tony mancill wrote:
What if you use FreeS/WAN (or really, any sort of IPsec)? It can be set
up in a mode that's called opportunistic encryption that will use IPsec
for communication when it's available and allow other traffic to proceed
as normal.
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 08:14:26PM -0700, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
Two choices (I like lists :) ):
(1) use libpam-ldap:
i recommend this. Even though the current pam system is a pain to
modify.. if you modify one file and it gets updated in the package it
will nag about it.. you can't tell if
Is there any reason why there is no OpenSSH 3.1
package for debian available yet?
is the "OpenSSH_3.0.2p1" version avaiable in the
testing/unstable tree already patched
against the "March 7, 2002: Off-by-one error in the channel code" security
hole?
thanks
Peter
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 14:34, Peter Lieven wrote:
Is there any reason why there is no OpenSSH 3.1 package for debian available
yet?
is the OpenSSH_3.0.2p1 version avaiable in the testing/unstable tree
already patched
against the March 7, 2002: Off-by-one error in the channel code security
Peter Lieven [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit:
is the OpenSSH_3.0.2p1 version avaiable in the testing/unstable tree
already patched
against the March 7, 2002: Off-by-one error in the channel code security
hole?
yes.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] : Junichi Uekawa
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:53:16PM +0200, Mark Janssen wrote:
Debian usually patches the (security) bug, without going straight to the
new upstream release, but only upgrading the package number
That's only the case with stable. In unstable, there is no reason not
to go straight to the new
Hi,
Just wanted to make it clear the the email i sent about Neomail was
purely to let other people know about a program that i thought was worth
mentioning, it had nothing to do with Ernie Miller and was not intended
to be SPAM.
Im sorry if i have caused you problems Ernie this is the last
I have a situation where my superiors are leaning heavily on me to make
life more convenient for them by having total availability of data from
a group of machines. They basically want to log into any one machine
within this group with the same password, and be able to access any
disks they
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 09:02:56PM -0500, Rob VanFleet wrote:
I work for several University astronomers who basically want something
like what they're used to at other places: a pure sun shop, running
NIS and NFS.
Two choices for authentication (passwd + shadow):
(1) Kerberos
Never used
Rob VanFleet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They basically want to log into any one machine within this group
with the same password, and be able to access any disks they choose
from any pariticular machine (within this group).
An AFS-based setup is used at many places to great effect, especially
hi ya
why not do the following ???
make one machine be your primary NIS server...
- all passwds defined there...
all other machines uses the NIS server for passwd authentication
and turn on ssh logins ( ~/.shosts ) w/o checking passwd
use automounter for
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 07:39:43PM -0700, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
Two choices for authentication (passwd + shadow):
(1) Kerberos
Never used it. Can't advise you.
I've looked at Kerberos, but at least a cursory glance at leaves the
impressions that it is ridiculously complicated to set up and
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:04:01PM -0500, Rob VanFleet wrote:
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 07:39:43PM -0700, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
Two choices for authentication (passwd + shadow):
(1) Kerberos
Never used it. Can't advise you.
I've looked at Kerberos, but at least a cursory glance at
25 matches
Mail list logo
