On 11/08/2016 1:11 AM, Mail Lists via freebsd-security wrote:
sorry but this is blabla and does not come even near to answering the real
problem:
It appears that freebsd and the US-government is more connected that some of us
might like:
Not publishing security issues concerning update
sorry but this is bullshit and does not come even near to answering the real
problem:
It appears that freebsd and the US-government is more connected that some of us
might like:
Not publishing security issues concerning update mechanisms - we all can think
WHY freebsd is not eager on this
sorry but this is blabla and does not come even near to answering the real
problem:
It appears that freebsd and the US-government is more connected that some of us
might like:
Not publishing security issues concerning update mechanisms - we all can think
WHY freebsd is not eager on this
On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 03:49:39 +
Martin Schroeder wrote:
> I've been analyzing the document extensively since then. The targets
> are as follows:
>
> [1] portsnap via portsnap vulnerabilities
> [2] portsnap via libarchive & tar anti-sandboxing vulnerabilities
> [3] portsnap via bspatch
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 09:50:37AM +0100, Big Lebowski wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Matthew Donovan
> wrote:
>
> > You mean operating system as distribution is a Linux term. There's not much
> > different between HARDENEDBSD and FreeBSD besides that HardenedBSD
> On 10 Aug 2016, at 10:50 AM, Big Lebowski wrote:
>
> With all due respect :)
Not really. Feel free to try again.
___
freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security
To
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Matthew Donovan
wrote:
> You mean operating system as distribution is a Linux term. There's not much
> different between HARDENEDBSD and FreeBSD besides that HardenedBSD fixes
> vulnerabilities and has a an excellent ASLR system compared to