Greetings,
I need to replace an aging Sun Fire V215 (SPARC-64bit) mail server.
I am thinking of using an Oracle/Sun X4-2(1 x Xeon E5-2650 v2 8-core 2.6
GHz CPU
internal Sun Storage 6 GB SAS PCI HBA) and two internal 300 GB1 rpm
2.5-inch
SAS-2 HDD), as unfortunately small SPARC servers are
Theo,
On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 04:38:24PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Kurt and Solar --
You are the primary contacts for the oss-security email list.
Kurt is not. I guess the reason why you got such impression was because
Kurt invited you to join distros recently, not knowing that you had
I've dropped CC to secur...@redhat.com, secur...@yandex.ru from this
reply, because I don't feel like spamming them. I kept the CC to
to...@yandex-team.ru, who I know is an OpenBSD user.
On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 10:57:56PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Solar and Kurt, a few questions:
I think you
On 06/06/2014 05:18 AM, Eric Furman wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014, at 08:36 PM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
Em 05-06-2014 21:23, David Goldsmith escreveu:
Probably ipfilter
http://christopher-technicalmusings.blogspot.com/2009/03/switching-firewalls-from-ipf-to-pf-on.html
If it is indeed
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014, at 04:20 AM, Renaud Allard wrote:
On 06/06/2014 05:18 AM, Eric Furman wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014, at 08:36 PM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
Em 05-06-2014 21:23, David Goldsmith escreveu:
Probably ipfilter
On 06/06/2014 12:47 PM, Eric Furman wrote:
That's a valid opinion, but as I said, I doubt it.
Vendors aren't stupid. With all that has happened lately,
given a choice the switch will not take long.
Given a choice, perhaps. But some will stick with OpenSSL only because
they want the money
Eric Furman said:
Given the current circumstances Libre.SSL WILL prevail.
I hope you are right, but I actually believe that the circumstances of
this thread may work against LibreSSL - most likely the time difference
between vulnerability disclosure and patches for LibreSSL would be
percieved as
On 06/06/14 14:49, Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote:
Eric Furman said:
Given the current circumstances Libre.SSL WILL prevail.
I hope you are right, but I actually believe that the circumstances of
this thread may work against LibreSSL - most likely the time difference
between vulnerability
Am 06.06.2014 14:15, schrieb Kapetanakis Giannis:
On 06/06/14 14:49, Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote:
Eric Furman said:
Given the current circumstances Libre.SSL WILL prevail.
I hope you are right, but I actually believe that the circumstances of
this thread may work against LibreSSL - most likely
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:37:54 -0700, Philip Guenther wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Adam Thompson athom...@athompso.netwrote:
Don't have a good answer for you, but I have similar problems with vio(4).
Switching to e1000 on the KVM side solved my random hangs completely.
Hello Patrick, All,
pkesh...@gmail.com (patrick keshishian), 2014.06.04 (Wed) 12:02 (CEST):
On 6/4/14, Marcus MERIGHI mcmer-open...@tor.at wrote:
Hello,
In my attempts to write a simple script that lets the user select
options with a single key stroke I found no other way than to use
On 06/06/14 15:24, Markus Rosjat wrote:
Let's hope then that when LibreSSL is in production it will not share
the same vulnerabilities with OpenSSL. Otherwise, what's the point?
G
well I don't know much but the point in removing 90k of c code lines
from something that is messed up means to
Hi,
Since I've seen many commits yesterday on cvs@ and no errata yet,
I'd like to ask if the current snapshots (05/06/2014) are updated with
the patches in question?
Should we wait for more to come or are these adequate?
Specificaly
i386/ (base55.tgz) =
Em 06-06-2014 07:47, Eric Furman escreveu:
This is a joke, right? I think you are sadly misinformed.
This is OPEN SOFTWARE. Vendors will choose the least problematic
software.
You are naive.
I think you underestimate the intelligence of SSL Vendors.
Free software is fantastic, we all
On 6 June 2014 14:38, Giancarlo Razzolini grazzol...@gmail.com wrote:
Em 06-06-2014 07:47, Eric Furman escreveu:
...
talking about. Funny thing, that I didn't needed to change any of my
banking passwords.
I don't know what, if anything, you're implying there.
Banks are generally
Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
Writing in caps doesn't make your assumption correct. I'd really like
that everybody would switch to LibreSSL. But It will not be as simple as
you are putting. First of all, there are lots of money involved. And
now, even more, because the Linux Foundation is funding
Em 06-06-2014 10:55, Dan Becker escreveu:
As a simple user who influences these decisions in deployments, I can
tell you my desire is to ssh tunnel all my openssl connections until
the guys who make SSH finish fixing ssl.
Look at SSH's track record compared to OpenSSL.
It's not practical
Em 06-06-2014 09:31, Christoph Borsbach escreveu:
Hello everyone,
I just wanted to report that I too had this problem (sporadic hangs of the
vio0-Interface) with 5.5-stable/amd64 in a KVM-VM. I tried the solution
described by Philip Guenther and voilá, the problems are gone. I did no tests
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini
grazzol...@gmail.com wrote:
Em 06-06-2014 09:31, Christoph Borsbach escreveu:
Hello everyone,
I just wanted to report that I too had this problem (sporadic hangs of the
vio0-Interface) with 5.5-stable/amd64 in a KVM-VM. I tried the solution
On 06/06/2014 06:23 PM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
Em 06-06-2014 09:31, Christoph Borsbach escreveu:
Hello everyone,
I just wanted to report that I too had this problem (sporadic hangs of the
vio0-Interface) with 5.5-stable/amd64 in a KVM-VM. I tried the solution
described by Philip Guenther
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 11:23:12 -0300, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
Em 06-06-2014 09:31, Christoph Borsbach escreveu:
Hello everyone,
I just wanted to report that I too had this problem (sporadic hangs of the
vio0-Interface) with 5.5-stable/amd64 in a KVM-VM. I tried the solution
described
Em 06-06-2014 13:18, Christoph Borsbach escreveu:
Hi,
sorry, I don't know that, it's a VM at a hoster. I have no acces to the
underlying host.
So, it could be a problem with the qemu/kvm version being a old one.
Mine is 2.0.0.
Cheers,
--
Giancarlo Razzolini
GPG: 4096R/77B981BC
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Giancarlo Razzolini
grazzol...@gmail.com wrote:
Em 06-06-2014 13:18, Christoph Borsbach escreveu:
Hi,
sorry, I don't know that, it's a VM at a hoster. I have no acces to the
underlying host.
So, it could be a problem with the qemu/kvm version being a old one.
Dear misc readers,
I try to understand why MAKEDEV is failing inside my chroot, while i
can manually create some dev with mknod .
Like:
SCRIPT ${DESTDIR}/dev/MAKEDEV dev/MAKEDEV
SPECIAL cd dev; sh MAKEDEV ramdisk
sh: stdin[1]: mknod: console: Invalid argument
sh: stdin[1]:
Le 06/06/2014 12:47, Eric Furman a écrit :
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014, at 04:20 AM, Renaud Allard wrote:
On 06/06/2014 05:18 AM, Eric Furman wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014, at 08:36 PM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
Em 05-06-2014 21:23, David Goldsmith escreveu:
Probably ipfilter
Misc,
So we knew that OpenSSL had some problems, indicated by the fact that they
were blissfully unaware that Valgrind gave warnings when compiling their
code, from the Debian debacle. Then Heartbleed came along, and people knew
how bad things really were, and then members of the OpenBSD got
To clarify and for the record:
Being on the distros list is not mandatory to receive advance
notification of security issues. The list is just a tool. People
reporting security issues to the distros list are encouraged to also
notify upstream projects/developers of the affected software, other
27 matches
Mail list logo
