| 1 |
Arturo Garcia wrote: |
| 2 |
>> This is now all transparent public knowledge. As such no security team |
| 3 |
>> worth their salt are going to leave these holes open. Remember that all |
| 4 |
>> the code mentioned above has been freely available for several years. |
| 5 |
> This is ridiculous. We are trying to bring up a service that was brought |
| 6 |
> down because a command-injection vulnerability, and that is the bug we are |
| 7 |
> trying |
| 8 |
> to close. The solution to this problem is what has been required to be |
| 9 |
> tested. Please don't deviate with arguments work that has to be done. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
No the point, as I see it, is that a security _audit_ of the code is now |
| 12 |
being carried out. Not a fix to one bug. That's why it would be great if |
| 13 |
the report were submitted. Or do you think it wise to bring the service |
| 14 |
back up with known flaws? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I didn't write the lines about the whole service needing reworking either. |
| 17 |
I'm just trying to explain why I think the process is being carried out |
| 18 |
properly. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
gentoo-project@g.o mailing list |
Archives