On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 01:36:38PM +1100, Rick Welykochy wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 12:28:48PM +1100, Howard Lowndes wrote: > > > Try the media. They usually like a good Internet security beatup story. > > > > > Suggestions anyone? > > How about the woman who wrote the daming article on a (ficticious) > security hole in RH Linux based on A.Toad's crap. > > Dominique Jackson from memory (The Australian) ... she owes us one ;^) Well Dominique Jackson has gone on to fashion writing(!) but she passed it onto someone else who has contacted me. He says he's contacted the new Eisa owners about it - "who will probably say 'Huh?'". SO it will be interesting if anything comes of it. Cheers, Graeme -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
- [SLUG] Linux doesn't have bad security... Graeme Merrall
- Re: [SLUG] Linux doesn't have bad security... John Ferlito
- Re: [SLUG] Linux doesn't have bad security... tom burkart
- Re: [SLUG] Linux doesn't have bad security... Howard Lowndes
- Re: [SLUG] Linux doesn't have bad security... Graeme Merrall
- Re: [SLUG] Linux doesn't have bad secu... Rick Welykochy
- Re: [SLUG] Linux doesn't have bad... Graeme Merrall
- Re: [SLUG] Linux doesn't have bad security... Jobst Schmalenbach
- Re: [SLUG] Linux doesn't have bad security... Graeme Merrall
- [SLUG] PHP vs Perl security. Michael Lake
- Re: [SLUG] PHP vs Perl security. Dean Hamstead
- Re: [SLUG] PHP vs Perl security. Jeff Waugh
- Re: [SLUG] PHP vs Perl security. Conrad Parker
- Re: [SLUG] PHP vs Perl security. Michael Lake
- Re: [SLUG] PHP vs Perl security. Jeff Waugh
- Re: [SLUG] PHP vs Perl security. Graeme Merrall
- Re: [SLUG] PHP vs Perl security. James Morris
