From owner-freebsd-security Tue Apr 14 09:02:52 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA08478 for freebsd-security-outgoing; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:02:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns.frihet.com (root@frihet.bayarea.net [205.219.92.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA08470 for ; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 16:02:41 GMT (envelope-from tweten@ns.frihet.com) Received: from ns.frihet.com (tweten@localhost.frihet.com [127.0.0.1]) by ns.frihet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA18069 for ; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:02:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tweten@ns.frihet.com) Message-Id: <199804141602.JAA18069@ns.frihet.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 Reply-to: tweten@frihet.com To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD-SA-98:02.mmap From: "David E. Tweten" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:02:39 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk It's been ten days, now, since security advisory FreeBSD-SA-98:02.mmap was sent, ten days since the signature on it failed to check using my copies of exmh and pgp, and ten days since I sent a report of that fact to Stefan Powell. Since then, silence. Nobody else seems to have mentioned any signature failure, and Powell has also been silent. Is it just me? Should I start debugging my copies of exmh and MIT pgp (as opposed to the crippled pgp in ports)? -- David E. Tweten | 2047-bit PGP fingerprint: | tweten@frihet.com 12141 Atrium Drive | E9 59 E7 5C 6B 88 B8 90 | tweten@and.com Saratoga, CA 95070-3162 | 65 30 2A A4 A0 BC 49 AE | (408) 446-4131 Those who make good products sell products; those who don't, sell solutions. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message