From owner-freebsd-security Mon Mar 24 7:30:27 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3167237B401; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 07:30:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from bodb.mc.mpls.visi.com (bodb.mc.mpls.visi.com [208.42.156.104]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1C4643FDF; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 07:30:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hawkeyd@visi.com) Received: from sheol.localdomain (hawkeyd-fw.dsl.visi.com [208.42.101.193]) by bodb.mc.mpls.visi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B77055EA; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 09:30:22 -0600 (CST) Received: (from hawkeyd@localhost) by sheol.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2OFUL008322; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 09:30:21 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from hawkeyd) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 09:30:21 -0600 From: D J Hawkey Jr To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" Cc: twig les , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: another TCPDump update question Message-ID: <20030324093021.A8296@sheol.localdomain> Reply-To: hawkeyd@visi.com References: <20030311231326.82217.qmail@web10107.mail.yahoo.com> <20030324151410.GE94153@madman.celabo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20030324151410.GE94153@madman.celabo.org>; from nectar@FreeBSD.ORG on Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 09:14:10AM -0600 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-31.8 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, RCVD_IN_UNCONFIRMED_DSBL,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mar 24, at 09:14 AM, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 03:13:26PM -0800, twig les wrote: > > The reason this ties into freebsd-security and not -questions is > > I'm still waiting for official word on a patch/upgrade procedure > > from the team. Am I being impatient here or did I miss > > something? I checked back over security-notifications and saw > > nothing. > > You didn't miss anything. There won't be a security advisory for this > issue. No? Without insulting anyone, may I ask why not? tcpdump is included in the base/standard OS, afterall, and so is libpcap, which appears to be related. IIRC, there have been SAs for DOS vulnerabilities before. What or where is the line for what is or is not eligible for a SA? > Cheers, > Jacques A. Vidrine http://www.celabo.org/ Thanks, Dave -- ______________________ ______________________ \__________________ \ D. J. HAWKEY JR. / __________________/ \________________/\ hawkeyd@visi.com /\________________/ http://www.visi.com/~hawkeyd/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message