Am Sonntag, 17. Februar 2008 01:11:05 schrieb Tim Brown:
The work flow should be as follows, IMO:
Initial request via tracker or mailing list - Request is discussed in
tracker and debated on list with any substantial points imported into
tracker - Consensus reached, developer documented
Hi Laban,
Am Samstag, 16. Februar 2008 17:20:59 schrieb Lmwangi:
Started hunting for warnings to fix based on their severity,
flawfinder -S -m 5 gives me an TOCTTOU alert for chmod'ing of the sockets:
openvas-libraries/libopenvas/bpf_share.c:368
./openvas-libnasl/nasl/nasl_server.c:92
Done
Hi,
On Monday 18 February 2008 22:10, Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
Am Samstag, 16. Februar 2008 17:20:59 schrieb Lmwangi:
Started hunting for warnings to fix based on their severity,
flawfinder -S -m 5 gives me an TOCTTOU alert for chmod'ing of the
sockets:
Hi,
I'd like to call for voting on the change requests #1 - #4,
listed here:
http://www.openvas.org/openvas-crs.html
Naturally, I am in favour of all 4 of them :-)
However, please read and judge whether it is a good
or bad idea or wether it needs further refinement.
I am not totally sure
On Wednesday 20 February 2008 00:08:24 Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to call for voting on the change requests #1 - #4,
listed here:
http://www.openvas.org/openvas-crs.html
Naturally, I am in favour of all 4 of them :-)
However, please read and judge whether it is a good
or bad
On Feb 19, 2008 7:35 PM, Tim Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 20 February 2008 00:08:24 Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to call for voting on the change requests #1 - #4,
listed here:
http://www.openvas.org/openvas-crs.html
Naturally, I am in favour of all 4 of
