Hi,
Wireshark is the world's foremost network protocol analyzer, and is
the de facto (and often de jure) standard across many industries and
educational institutions.
Wireshark development thrives thanks to the contributions of networking
experts across the globe. It is the continuation of a proje
> Wireshark is the world's foremost
Is this now priviledge seperated?
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/net/ethereal/Attic/Makefile#rev1.91
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 14:47:57 +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote
> > Wireshark is the world's foremost
>
> Is this now priviledge seperated?
Actually, their Wiki says so:
http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/PrivilegeSeparation
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 14:47:57 +0200
Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> > Wireshark is the world's foremost
>
> Is this now priviledge seperated?
>
> http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/net/ethereal/Attic/Makefile#rev1.91
As I've checked here:
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1741
On 2009/04/15 14:47, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> > Wireshark is the world's foremost
>
> Is this now priviledge seperated?
>
> http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/net/ethereal/Attic/Makefile#rev1.91
>
Not as we know the term "privilege separation", no.
They split the capture off into a sepa
I think I'm going to use this as a case study...
Yes, this is heavy flame material, but I'm in a fey mood...
So we ousted wireshark (at the time ethereal) out of the ports tree
because of its lack of security.
Now, we get a port that claims it's all fixed and better.
>From what sthen@ says, it
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 06:14:40PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> [espie@ rant goes here...]
All valid points, but what has this to do with importing it into the
ports tree? ;) It's not like ports isn't full of crappy apps with
security problems, not to mention the lack of -stable ports.
I find the e
On Thursday 16 April 2009 13:12:34 Tobias Ulmer wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 06:14:40PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> > [espie@ rant goes here...]
>
> All valid points, but what has this to do with importing it into the
> ports tree? ;) It's not like ports isn't full of crappy apps with
> security
