Bug#639744: Compromised certificates for *.google.com issued by DigiNotar Root CA

2011-08-29 Thread Yves-Alexis Perez
On lun., 2011-08-29 at 20:24 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 08:32:40PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: > > On Monday 29 August 2011 20:19:11 Josh Triplett wrote: > > > Does OpenSSL not have any facility for a system-wide revocation > list? > > > > No, I already checked that b

Bug#639744: Compromised certificates for *.google.com issued by DigiNotar Root CA

2011-08-29 Thread Josh Triplett
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 08:32:40PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: > On Monday 29 August 2011 20:19:11 Josh Triplett wrote: > > Does OpenSSL not have any facility for a system-wide revocation list? > > No, I already checked that back when the Comodo hack occurred. > Every application needs to manua

Bug#639744: Compromised certificates for *.google.com issued by DigiNotar Root CA

2011-08-29 Thread Raphael Geissert
On Monday 29 August 2011 20:19:11 Josh Triplett wrote: > Does OpenSSL not have any facility for a system-wide revocation list? No, I already checked that back when the Comodo hack occurred. Every application needs to manually load the revocation lists, just like they need to manually check the tr

Bug#639744: Compromised certificates for *.google.com issued by DigiNotar Root CA

2011-08-29 Thread Josh Triplett
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 08:09:02PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: > On Monday 29 August 2011 16:03:57 Josh Triplett wrote: > > Whatever resolution Mozilla and others end up with (revocation of the > > certificate or of the entire CA), ca-certificates will likely need to > > do the same. > > FWIW,

Bug#639744: Compromised certificates for *.google.com issued by DigiNotar Root CA

2011-08-29 Thread Raphael Geissert
On Monday 29 August 2011 16:03:57 Josh Triplett wrote: > Whatever resolution Mozilla and others end up with (revocation of the > certificate or of the entire CA), ca-certificates will likely need to > do the same. FWIW, individual certificates can't be "revoked" in ca-certificates. Shipping revoca

Bug#639744: Followup from Mozilla

2011-08-29 Thread Josh Triplett
https://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/08/29/fraudulent-google-com-certificate/ Looks like Mozilla plans to disable the entire root for now. ca-certificates should follow suit. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscri

Bug#639744: Compromised certificates for *.google.com issued by DigiNotar Root CA

2011-08-29 Thread Josh Triplett
Package: ca-certificates Version: 20110502 Severity: critical Tags: security Please see the following: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=682956 http://pastebin.com/ff7Yg663 http://pastebin.com/SwCZqskV (or just search current news for "DigiNotar", optionally in conjunction with "gmail"

tinylaf_1.4.0-2_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

2011-08-29 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Accepted: tinylaf_1.4.0-2.diff.gz to main/t/tinylaf/tinylaf_1.4.0-2.diff.gz tinylaf_1.4.0-2.dsc to main/t/tinylaf/tinylaf_1.4.0-2.dsc tinylaf_1.4.0-2_all.deb to main/t/tinylaf/tinylaf_1.4.0-2_all.deb Override entries for your package: tinylaf_1.4.0-2.dsc - source utils tinylaf_1.4.0-2_al

tagsoup_1.2-3_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

2011-08-29 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Accepted: libtagsoup-java-doc_1.2-3_all.deb to main/t/tagsoup/libtagsoup-java-doc_1.2-3_all.deb libtagsoup-java_1.2-3_all.deb to main/t/tagsoup/libtagsoup-java_1.2-3_all.deb tagsoup_1.2-3.diff.gz to main/t/tagsoup/tagsoup_1.2-3.diff.gz tagsoup_1.2-3.dsc to main/t/tagsoup/tagsoup_1.2-3.ds

Processing of tinylaf_1.4.0-2_amd64.changes

2011-08-29 Thread Debian FTP Masters
tinylaf_1.4.0-2_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: tinylaf_1.4.0-2.dsc tinylaf_1.4.0-2.diff.gz tinylaf_1.4.0-2_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ..

Processing of tagsoup_1.2-3_amd64.changes

2011-08-29 Thread Debian FTP Masters
tagsoup_1.2-3_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: tagsoup_1.2-3.dsc tagsoup_1.2-3.diff.gz libtagsoup-java_1.2-3_all.deb libtagsoup-java-doc_1.2-3_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE

Bug#639196: [src:timidity] A debdiff to fix the FTBFS bug

2011-08-29 Thread Geoffrey Thomas
Thanks -- I do have (essentially) that fix in my intended upload, but forgot about the dpkg-dev versioned build dependency. I'll fix that and will poke my sponsor again. -- Geoffrey Thomas geo...@ldpreload.com On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, Mònica Ramírez Arceda wrote: tags 639196 patch thanks Hi, I

Bug#639196: [src:timidity] A debdiff to fix the FTBFS bug

2011-08-29 Thread Mònica Ramírez Arceda
tags 639196 patch thanks Hi, I attach a debdiff with a QA Upload to solve this bug. As this package has an ITA, maybe this patch can be added to the adoption :-) I can try to ask for a sponsor to make the QA upload if the adopter prefers it. Cheers, Mònica diff -Nru timidity-2.13.2/debian/chang

Processed: [src:timidity] A debdiff to fix the FTBFS bug

2011-08-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 639196 patch Bug #639196 [src:timidity] timidity: FTBFS: nas_a.c:201: undefined reference to `AuNextEvent' Added tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 639196: http://bugs.debian.org/c

Processed: z88: send tags to control@b.d.o

2011-08-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 639059 patch Bug #639059 [src:z88] z88: FTBFS: /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdktypes.h:55:23: fatal error: gdkconfig.h: No such file or directory Added tag(s) patch. > user ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com Setting user to ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.

Bug#639560: symbol changes

2011-08-29 Thread Regis Boudin
Hi, I made the upload, so I guess I should comment on this. On Sun, 2011-08-28 at 15:39 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Philipp Kern , 2011-08-28, 10:52: > >The package FTBFS'es on mips, powerpc, s390, sparc and the inofficial > >ports s390x and powerpcspe because of changes in the symbol set wrt t