From owner-freebsd-security Thu Jul 13 11:54: 0 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.via-net-works.net.ar (ns1.via-net-works.net.ar [200.10.100.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AC7A37B924 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 11:53:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fpscha@ns1.via-net-works.net.ar) Received: (from fpscha@localhost) by ns1.via-net-works.net.ar (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA02673; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 15:52:38 -0300 (GMT) From: Fernando Schapachnik Message-Id: <200007131852.PAA02673@ns1.via-net-works.net.ar> Subject: Re: Two kinds of advisories? In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000713122244.00b06410@localhost> from Brett Glass at "Jul 13, 0 12:26:06 pm" To: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass) Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 15:52:37 -0300 (GMT) Cc: dga@POBOX.COM, security@FreeBSD.ORG Reply-To: Fernando Schapachnik X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL40 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org En un mensaje anterior, Brett Glass escribió: > Yes, I know, it'd be nice if they weren't so clueless about computer > security and FreeBSD, but then, they're experts in their own fields, > which WE don't know much about. Instead of writing them off, why > not make the subject lines clearer? Maybe they shouldn't read bugtraq if they are not cualified (as I don't read the New England Medical Journal scanning for new deseases). Regards! Fernando P. Schapachnik Administración de la red VIA NET.WORKS ARGENTINA S.A. fernando@via-net-works.net.ar (54-11) 4323-3333 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message