On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 12:40:47PM -0500, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote: > > > Well I guess that this one is definitely elligible for the "qmail security > challenge". > > http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/qmail-challenge.html > > If you don't count that as a bug in qmail, then I don't know what is a > bug... > It's a bug. However, it would not qualify: 8. The following types of bugs are specifically disqualified: + Exploits that involve corrupting DNS data, breaking TCP/IP, breaking NFS, or denying service (except for the case above). Also, http://cr.yp.to/qmail/guarantee.html specifically mentions that DoS is not part of the deal. Greetz, Peter.
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX ... Mark Delany
- RE: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an... Patrick Bihan-Faou
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX ... Charles Cazabon
- RE: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX ... Virginia Chism
- RE: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an... Patrick Bihan-Faou
- The joy of Qmail qmail
- Re: The joy of Qmail Charles Cazabon
- RE: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX reco... Patrick Bihan-Faou
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX record of... Dave Sill
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX record of... paul
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX record of... Peter van Dijk
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX record of... D. J. Bernstein
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX reco... Pavel Kankovsky
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX ... Dan Peterson
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an... Pavel Kankovsky
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handlin... Vince Vielhaber
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX reco... Peter van Dijk
- Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX reco... Scott Gifford
- RE: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX record of... Greg Owen
