From owner-freebsd-security Tue Dec 19 1:20: 0 2000 From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 19 01:19:58 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDFAA37B400; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 01:19:57 -0800 (PST) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA00945; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 10:19:55 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from des@ofug.org) Sender: des@ofug.org X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: bmah@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Roman Shterenzon , Chris Faulhaber , Mikhail Kruk , James Lim , security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Security Update Tool.. References: <200012181803.eBII3Ew94725@bmah-freebsd-0.cisco.com> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 19 Dec 2000 10:19:55 +0100 In-Reply-To: "Bruce A. Mah"'s message of "Mon, 18 Dec 2000 10:03:14 -0800" Message-ID: Lines: 11 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) Emacs/20.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Bruce A. Mah" writes: > To be honest, I haven't seen porteasy, but my feeling about #3 above is > that it's really really hard for an automated system to get right all of > the time. Yes, it was hard to implement, but I'm confident that porteasy gets it right. Feel free to prove me wrong. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message