Can we bring some peace to this list? Please?
-Jim P.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Steve Hagerman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 10:43 PM
These people and their treasonist attitudes make me wish
that our nation would Enforce the laws against treason.
Right now I would settle for the Debian.org admins to enforce the
I have a complaint/opinion/statement to express. It seems that every now
and then when I run 'apt-get upgrade' i get a lot of errors about Can't
exec /tmp/config.x: Permission denied at I like to keep my
Debian boxen nice and secure, so I 'chmod +t /tmp' to prevent temp files
from being
Message-
From: Noah L. Meyerhans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Noah L.
Meyerhans
Sent: Saturday, 12 July, 2003 21:34
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: execute permissions in /tmp
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 09:22:45PM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
I have a complaint/opinion/statement
-Original Message-
From: Matt Zimmerman
Sent: Sunday, 13 July, 2003 23:56
If the user can read files in /tmp, they can execute the code in
them. What problem is noexec /tmp supposed to solve?
Microsoft did a related thing a few years ago, they moved the TEMP directory
to the users
Can we bring some peace to this list? Please?
-Jim P.
-Original Message-
From: Steve Hagerman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 10:43 PM
These people and their treasonist attitudes make me wish
that our nation would Enforce the laws against treason.
Right now I would settle for the Debian.org admins to enforce the
I have a complaint/opinion/statement to express. It seems that every now
and then when I run 'apt-get upgrade' i get a lot of errors about Can't
exec /tmp/config.x: Permission denied at I like to keep my
Debian boxen nice and secure, so I 'chmod +t /tmp' to prevent temp files
from being
Message-
From: Noah L. Meyerhans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Noah L.
Meyerhans
Sent: Saturday, 12 July, 2003 21:34
To: debian-security@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: execute permissions in /tmp
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 09:22:45PM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
I have a complaint/opinion
-Original Message-
From: Matt Zimmerman
Sent: Sunday, 13 July, 2003 23:56
If the user can read files in /tmp, they can execute the code in
them. What problem is noexec /tmp supposed to solve?
Microsoft did a related thing a few years ago, they moved the TEMP directory
to the users
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
kevin bailey wrote:
Why is portmap installed by default on a vanilla basic Debian Sarge install?
Because someone thinks that *every* Debian uses NFS. Granted, it's not
worth going back to change Sarge's installer, however if Sid or Etch
have this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Dobbs wrote:
I'm surprised more people haven't reported these problems. Maybe they
were ignored because they did resemble the older problem with the
signing key so closely.
I do recall seeing something similar to what you describe, but it
On Sun, 2006-10-29 at 23:54 +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
Do you set kernel.panic in /etc/sysctl.conf?
I'm curious, what does that do?
Tia,
-Jim P.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 15:10 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
This is unfortunately an effect of an issue with the old mod_delay patch.
It's not an exploiting of the known issue. You have to either disable
mod_delay or use
1.2.10-20sarge1 which is available at
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 12:28 -0500, Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 15:10 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
This is unfortunately an effect of an issue with the old mod_delay patch.
It's not an exploiting of the known issue. You have to either disable
mod_delay or use
On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 10:26 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 09:21:34PM -0500, Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 12:28 -0500, Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 15:10 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
This is unfortunately an effect
On Sun, 2007-03-04 at 21:56 -0300, Felipe Figueiredo wrote:
Hello all,
tripwire's default policy includes /proc. Why, what's the point? At least in
my systems, its files change more often than my logs rotate (which despite my
efforts insist on rotating on a daily basis).
So, is it safe
On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 20:30 -0500, George P Boutwell wrote:
I don't remember the exact details, but the problem I think revolved
around not being able to properly boot-up since the /tmp and/or the
/var/tmp where needed during the boot, but not being mounted yet.
Actually in order for /tmp
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 00:42 +0200, David Martínez Moreno wrote:
This is getting slightly annoying...
This time murphy.debian.org said NO to relaying.
Best regards,
Even worse... murphy is still passing on spam. The latest one I got has
a received header of:
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 19:15 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Sunday 22 April 2007 01:58, Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 20:30 -0500, George P Boutwell wrote:
I don't remember the exact details, but the problem I think revolved
around not being able to properly
On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 00:14 +0300, Tomas Nykung wrote:
What I don't understand is why I always got the bad mirror, regardless
how many times I tried to rerun aptitude/apt-get update both yesterday
and today (and on two computers while the first one I upgraded did get
the upgrade without any
On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 11:23 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
In any case, I really would be interested in hearing from people who
have managed to get a spam filtering setup going that allows only a
0.66% false negative rate.
I think you will have better success discussing that over on SPAM-L.
On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 03:41 +, Pascal Hakim wrote:
The spam email you're complaining about was sent by a subscriber. Does
that mean it's not spam?
No, it still is spam. It's not requested by any other list members.
The solution is to auto-mod new subscribers. Do that and all this mess
What's up with security.debian.org? Apt is missing it. ;-)
-Jim P.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 00:32 -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
What's up with security.debian.org? Apt is missing it. ;-)
Of course, as soon as I send the email
disregard previous email, apologies.
-Jim P.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 18:08 +0200, Willi Mann wrote:
Hi!
Since yesterday, a new kernel for sarge seems to be available. However,
the kernel-image meta package 101sarge2 was only available yesterday.
Today, it's no longer available.
What has happened here?
Something strange is certainly
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 10:26 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
This release was quite confusing, because it applies only to sarge,
I'm still not seeing this release on security.debian.org using
deb http://security.debian.org/ sarge/updates main
Any ideas why?
-Jim P.
--
To
On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 03:43 -0600, dann frazier wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:49:16PM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 10:26 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
This release was quite confusing, because it applies only to sarge,
I'm still not seeing this release
On Sun, 2007-06-24 at 16:50 +0100, andy baxter wrote:
The difference is that:
a) These all run on the live system they are trying to protect,
Unless you configure them to only write to an offline mount point that
is normally ro and only rw through external effort which is in
Tripwire's
Why not add 3 deb packages (deb-user, deb-workstation, deb-server) and
prompt the user during install for which style box they are setting
up. Then the selected package could have (or not have) necessary
dependencies for the system style. For instance, deb-user could
depend on lokkit as well as
On Thu, 2007-12-20 at 01:12 +, Stephen Gran wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Dominic Hargreaves said:
Are there any updates planned for sarge in volatile.debian.org?
Yes, and they're uploaded.
Where?
-Jim P.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
On Thu, 2007-12-20 at 20:07 +, J. Santos wrote:
So, i would like to thank all those who toke the time to clarify this
matter.
Thank you all.
I would also like to add my Thanks to everyone involved.
Thank you,
-Jim P.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
I've got one etch box complaining, for 18 hours now, about new pending
updates. Specifically:
apache2-mpm-worker
apache2-utils
apache2.2-common
debconf
debconf-i18n
findutils
klibc-utils
libc6
libc6-i686
On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 22:42 +, Alexander Wirt wrote:
Yes
:-)
http://www.us.debian.org/News/2007/20071227
Actually I didn't miss that, or rather I did get that email today
but in the past I seem to recall the process was individual DSAs and
releases, followed by a bundled new release
On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 17:55 -0500, Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 22:42 +, Alexander Wirt wrote:
Yes
:-)
http://www.us.debian.org/News/2007/20071227
Actually I didn't miss that, or rather I did get that email today
but in the past I seem to recall the process
On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 22:36 +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
On Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 22:10:08 +0100, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
However, I cannot see any security announcement for most of these. Were
they
updated because of the security fix for tar? If yes, why doesn’t the
security
On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 16:38 -0500, Pls check this new site wrote:
Please see this site in Subject
SO... is someone at d.o doing something constructive about all these
The risk is that d.o might eventually start getting blocked elsewhere.
For instance, if I people telling
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Robert Shadowen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
help
==
Robert Shadowen
Simulation/Verification Tools [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IBM Austin
I haven't seen any other news about this, I show 7 pending updates for
which no DSA or notices have gone out. Given that d.o servers have
been hacked in the past, are these updates valid and where can I find
official info about them?
apache2-mpm-worker:
Installed: 2.2.3-4+etch3
Candidate:
On Feb 17, 2008 8:18 AM, Alexander Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/debian-announce-2008/msg0.html
One additional thing that is not clear to me is that I see pending
updates for libc6 and libc6-dev that are NOT mentioned in that
announcement.
-Jim P.
On Feb 17, 2008 8:18 AM, Alexander Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080217 06:46]:
I haven't seen any other news about this, I show 7 pending updates for
which no DSA or notices have gone out. Given that d.o servers have
been hacked in the past
On Feb 17, 2008 3:48 PM, Alexander Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, as the last couple of announcement did. The problem is, that if we
announce a new release before it is send to the mirrors, mirrors are hit
very hard hindering the sync of our mirror network.
So in general we first push
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Filipus Klutiero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This statement is in a security announcement. Martin Schulze confirmed that
he
wrote the statement. Does the security team think that oldstable security
support duration is something to be proud of?
Yes. This
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 3:01 PM, Filipus Klutiero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le March 10, 2008 02:57:56 pm Jim Popovitch, vous avez écrit :
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Filipus Klutiero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This statement is in a security announcement. Martin Schulze confirmed
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Filipus Klutiero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le March 10, 2008 03:15:04 pm Jim Popovitch, vous avez écrit :
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 3:01 PM, Filipus Klutiero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le March 10, 2008 02:57:56 pm Jim Popovitch, vous avez écrit :
On Mon
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Filipus Klutiero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Debian is somewhat better than openSUSE, equal or slightly worst than Ubuntu
and definitely worst than RHEL and derivatives. So on average, Debian is
somewhat worst than its main alternatives in this aspect.
On what
NOTE: adding debian-security to the mix...
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Mike Dornberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
maybe there are build issues. If you count the binary versions, you'll see
there are 7 archs on which e. g. clamav-daemon 0.93 got built, but 10 for
0.92-something.
Perhaps one
Well, I thought I had seen it all... but this takes the cake.
http://ike.egr.msu.edu/debian/pool/
-Jim P.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 2:05 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this is weird. but, somehow it is hard to believe. it is possible to change
the identification string to anything right? maybe it is apache but trying
to be IIS???
That would be nice if true... but I seriously doubt that to be the case.
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
It's mirror's like that, that make me paranoid about Debian Security.
Why is that? IIS is the second most used web server on the market. And since
mirrors are not a trusted part
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Simon Valiquette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Popovitch un jour écrivit:
If they want to do this, fine. But should they continue to be in
rotation for ftp.us.debian.org?
Personnaly, I would have chosen to impersonate another web server than
IIS, but except
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 7:00 PM, Jacob Appelbaum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your thoughts on this subject are really fascinating. Because while I
agree that the idea of security by obscurity as the only line of
defense is flawed, you're making assumptions and value judgments that
seem beyond your
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Martin Bartenberger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks a lot guys, I like all of your suggestions (the virtual RMS made me
laugh, never heard of this before).
Seems like TIMTOWTDI, reminds me of PERL ;-)
I will play around with all of them and find out which one
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 4:06 PM, W. Martin Borgert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:38:33AM +0200, Filip Husak wrote:
I think the following command resolves your problem:
for pkg in `dpkg -l | grep ii | awk '{print $2}'` ; do if [ `apt-cache
show $pkg | grep
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
grep -v '^Filename: pool\/main\/' will get everything not in main,
which is the OP's intention, IIRC.
Just to be clear, this cmd shows me all pkgs not in main:
for pkg in `dpkg -l | grep ii | awk '{print $2}'` ; do
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 7:36 PM, Michael Gilbert
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
wouldn't it be better to send this person a warning? i'm sure it was
just an honest mistake. it seems rather harsh to purge them from the
mailing list without giving them a fair chance to remedy their
mistake.
Honest
Ok, this is the weekend for DNS strangeness... so my suspicions are
easily raised by the following:
~$ apt-get update
..
~$ apt-get upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
The following packages will be upgraded:
apache2-mpm-worker apache2-utils
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 12:19 PM, Riku Valli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May be debsecan is suitable for you?
Hold crap Batman! That's a lot of low urgency issues open in Etch.
-Jim P.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
I'm seeing some inconsistencies floating around and reaching out here
for some clarification ;-)
According to this source
http://idssi.enyo.de/tracker/CVE-2006-0658
Etch package moin is vulnerable.
However there is no mention of it here:
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 17:44, Mapper ict department
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have Debian Etch with the volatile clamav installed. This is
the version:
0.94.dfsg.1-1~volatile1
That is the one affected if i am not mistaking.
We have the volatile archive in the apt-get sources list:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 07:27, Dominic Hargreaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think that's relevant to volatile versions though.
To Volatile or Not to Volatile. That is the question (now).Is
volatile a dead thing and security now back to real-time updates?
I'm ok with manually
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 13:21, Dominic Hargreaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't really understand your question. There is no separate security
archive for volatile, as I understand it.
Oddly enough I understood Tony, yet I don't understand the
Volative+ClamAV situation. Can someone
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 15:10, Michael Tautschnig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess only the volatile archive maintainers can help out.
Yet they have been silent for several days now on this issue. Are
they overloaded? Do we need new volatile maintainers? Who's in the
know here?
-Jim P.
--
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 00:55, Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
---
Debian Volatile Update Announcement VUA 51-1 http://volatile.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Stephen Gran
Dec 11,
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 19:10, Stephen Vaughan stephenvaug...@gmail.com wrote:
When will people learn not to set auto replies
all people? never. You can only do so much education before you
have to give up. The real solution is to fix bad email clients. A
proper email client, or vacation
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 12:50 AM, Izak Burger isbur...@gmail.com wrote:
our own auto-reply exim router (as requested by clients) checks for about 16
different headers
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 06:44, Dusty Wilson du...@hey.nu wrote:
[snip]
I understand that it takes both sides to fix the
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 07:29, Frank Lanitz fr...@frank.uvena.de wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:15:30 -0500 Jim Popovitch ya...@jimpop.com wrote:
Bah!! Headers change over time. The simple and easy way to solve
OoO problems is for vacation responders to only reply to From:/Sender
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 09:33, Roger Bumgarnerroger.bumgar...@gmail.com wrote:
ALLOW rules and SSH-keys.
Is there a way to force keys AND passwd verification?
-Jim P.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 08:32, Nico Golde debian-security...@ngolde.de wrote:
No and as this is no serious issue we also decided to not release a DSA for
this. We will encourage the maintainer to provide updated packages through
stable-proposed-updates.
I, for one, Thank you for decisions like
WTF? Come on folks. who's running this list?
-Jim P.
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 22:14, Adobe PDF n...@adobe-v2010.com wrote:
New Version of Adobe PDF Reader for all Windows platforms
Dear valued customers,
50%-60% of your daily office works requires document handling.
70% of your
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 04:17, Yves-Alexis Perez cor...@debian.org wrote:
On sam., 2010-07-03 at 23:37 -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
WTF? Come on folks. who's running this list?
Please don't reply to spam, especially not quoting them.
Please quit allowing your systems to send me spam
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 13:48, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
Multiple people already spend lots of time working on the spam filtering
for this list, and it's about as good as it can get given the requirements
the Debian project has for openness for its mailing lists. It's unlikely
to get
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 15:13, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
* Jim Popovitch (jim...@gmail.com) wrote:
How about I volunteer to tackle that remaining 5% rather than giving
up so easily?
Erm, seriously?
Yes. Esp based on the last 2 paragraphs on this page:
http://www.debian.org
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 19:31, Stephen Gran sg...@debian.org wrote:
No, Russ implied that reality occasionally intrudes on fantasies of
spam-free inboxes.
Russ stated:
It's unlikely to get substantially better than it is (I believe
we're already
rejecting something like 95% of the
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 20:08, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
Jim Popovitch jim...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 19:31, Stephen Gran sg...@debian.org wrote:
No, Russ implied that reality occasionally intrudes on fantasies of
spam-free inboxes.
Russ stated:
It's unlikely
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 09:49, Roger Hanna ru...@rogers.com wrote:
Ok Folks, really, your mails about the spam are starting to actually spam!
Wait, this email is then also considered a spam about spamming.
You just can't win.
Good thing the FOSS ppl don't think like that.
-Jim P.
--
To
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 17:38, Arthur Machlas arthur.mach...@gmail.com wrote:
Forward all mail to a gmail account, then forward back to Debian's
list-servs. Spam problem solved.
except Debian pushes hard for their outbound mail host to be
whitelisted... which is also a reason the default
2010/11/22 mark.bre...@creditplus.de:
Ich bin bis 29.11.2010 abwesend.
Header Auto-Submitted: auto-generated existed.Why can't the
Debian lists simply discard these?
-Jim P.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 21:38, Michael Cassano mcass...@gmail.com wrote:
No, this is not the right place to ask. A better place is Google, for
instance.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=enq=how%20do%20I%20tell%20what%20version%20of%20debian%20I%20am%20runningbtnG=Search
Oh, come on. We can
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 02:18, Andrew McGlashan
andrew.mcglas...@affinityvision.com.au wrote:
Hi,
Chris Bannister wrote:
Naturally, I assume you would do a google first!!! Just think, in a few
years time if someone googles your name, will they think you
ignorant/lazy and not able to use a
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 20:12, Ash Narayanan ashvinnaraya...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you imagine stepping in to a pet *security* store with a question about
your
pets *health* symptoms to be abused by the store attendant for not going to a
vet instead?
^ There, I fixed it for you.
-Jim P.
--
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 22:50, Mike Mestnik cheako...@gmail.com wrote:
From what I can tell debian-security is listed under [2]User and not under
[3]Developer lists, so it stands to reason that users should be encouraged
to seek assistance from this list's members.
2.
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 23:33, Andrew McGlashan
andrew.mcglas...@affinityvision.com.au wrote:
Chris Wadge wrote:
PS: I've solved my problem. Thanks to those that actually helped.
Besides all the noise, the version of Lenny can be directly relevant to
the security of the installation ... and
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 07:00, John Keimel j...@keimel.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 6:49 AM, Ashley Taylor ash...@getdarker.com wrote:
Hi,
Does anyone have any decent filter rules for Gmail so I can stop receiving
this nonsense without unsubscribing?
Thanks.
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 13:57, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote:
On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 18:34 -0800, Account for Debian group mail wrote:
Well I waited to see if someone came our with a solution to this problem,
none seen. So I'm updating another machine, here is what dselect is
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 14:07, Jim Popovitch jim...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 13:57, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk
wrote:
On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 18:34 -0800, Account for Debian group mail wrote:
Well I waited to see if someone came our with a solution to this problem
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated. EOM
-Jim P.
2011/1/27 mark.bre...@creditplus.de:
Ich bin bis 21.02.2011 abwesend.
Hinweis: Dies ist eine automatische Antwort auf Ihre Nachricht [SECURITY]
[DSA 2152-1] hplip security update gesendet am 27.01.2011 23:35:07.
Diese ist die einzige
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 23:08, Steven Bownas sbow...@us.ibm.com wrote:
I am out of the office until 06/09/2011.
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on liszt.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=4.0 tests=AUTOGENERATE,AUTOREBOD,FOURLA,
On Wed, 2018-12-26 at 23:57 +0800, Samson wrote:
> https://github.com/hardenedlinux/harbian-audit/blob/master/docs/CIS_De
> bian_Linux_8_Benchmark_v1.0.0.pdf
I'm curious,
Does CIS know that you are distributing their published work?
-Jim P.
On Thu, 2018-12-27 at 09:32 +0800, Shawn wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 1:06 AM Jim Popovitch wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2018-12-26 at 23:57 +0800, Samson wrote:
> > > https://github.com/hardenedlinux/harbian-audit/blob/master/docs/CI
> > > S_De
90 matches
Mail list logo
