Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 18:42:26 +0200 From: Esa Karkkainen <ejk@iki.fi> To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Cc: Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru> Subject: Re: security scripts diff Message-ID: <20100201164226.GA4715@pp.htv.fi> In-Reply-To: <20100201004003.GE12157@bunrab.catwhisker.org> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1002010310180.61449@woozle.rinet.ru> <20100201004003.GE12157@bunrab.catwhisker.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 04:40:03PM -0800, David Wolfskill wrote: > On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 03:13:39AM +0300, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote: > > Dear colleagues, > > > > looking at regular security mails I found that foloowing patch would greatly > > desreases amount of false positive reports; it's totally possible I'm missing > > some vital areas, but my current look at security scripts did not reveal any. > > > > What do you think? Thank you in advance. > > ... > > I think maybe -b ("Ignore changes in the amount of white space.") might > be better than -w ("Ignore all white space."), as the presence or > absence of *some* white space can be a signifant difference (e.g., to a > non-FORTRAN IV parser). I've always disliked the feature which lists unchanged files on security emails (100.chksetuid). I've created a patch some time ago. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=conf/119464 -- "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." -- Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100201164226.GA4715>