From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Dec 8 16:52:41 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6810DE884E5 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 16:52:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsdports@cloudzeeland.nl) Received: from ares.cloudzeeland.nl (cloudzeeland.xs4all.nl [83.161.133.58]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "cloudzeeland.nl", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AE7D7A0DE for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 16:52:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsdports@cloudzeeland.nl) Received: from ares.cloudzeeland.nl (unknown [10.10.10.32]) by ares.cloudzeeland.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id A71614FD44A8 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 17:52:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.10.10.34] (styx.zeeland24.nl [82.176.127.71]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ares.cloudzeeland.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C2A94FD44A7 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 17:52:37 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: Procmail Vulnerabilities check To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <35462A5975FEC081916D9331@triton.njm.me.uk> From: Jos Chrispijn Message-ID: Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 17:52:39 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <35462A5975FEC081916D9331@triton.njm.me.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: nl X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP on ares.cloudzeeland.nl X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2017 16:52:41 -0000 Nick, Op 8-12-2017 om 17:32 schreef N.J. Mann: > See https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=223777 > specifically the patch in "Comment 2". I have been using this > patch for a few days without problems. > > Sadly the vulnerability check still fails. Unfortunatly I am neither that of a programmer ./Jos