From owner-freebsd-security Mon Mar 17 13: 0: 8 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 09E2E37B401 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 13:00:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from buexe.b-5.de (buexe.b-5.de [212.14.80.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90AA043F3F for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 13:00:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lupe@lupe-christoph.de) Received: from antalya.lupe-christoph.de ([172.17.0.9]) by buexe.b-5.de (8.11.6/8.11.6/b-5/buexe-2.2) with ESMTP id h2HKwxt30250; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:58:59 +0100 Received: by antalya.lupe-christoph.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8BA815E0; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:58:55 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:58:55 +0100 To: Brooks Davis Cc: Tobias Roth , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: freebsd-security-questions (was: Re: openssh 3.5 connection timeout) Message-ID: <20030317205855.GA308@lupe-christoph.de> References: <15678.24.218.220.202.1047852089.squirrel@webmail.wvths.com> <20030317074556.GA28299@speedy.unibe.ch> <20030317182110.GJ12105@lupe-christoph.de> <20030317104101.D21173@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030317104101.D21173@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i From: lupe@lupe-christoph.de (Lupe Christoph) 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 Monday, 2003-03-17 at 10:41:01 -0800, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 07:21:10PM +0100, Lupe Christoph wrote: > > PS: I have to admit that I'm always confused by the difference in > > policies between debian-security and freebsd-security. The Debian > > crowd welcomes all questions related to security while the freebsd > > crowd seems to be obsessed with policies. > freebsd-security gained a strict no general questions policy recently > because it was discovered that virtually no developers were reading > the list due to all the stupid questions. This included most of the > developers who do anything related to security. Maybe this means that freebsd-security is already a "questions" list. Maybe this means that a security-devel list is in order. Or maybe developers don't need a security list because security is always foremost in their minds ;-) My experience is that a mailing list that has been lost to a group of people has a real challenge regaining those people. It seems to be easier to start a new mailing list. Full-disclosure had a really good start until it fell prey to Stoopid Eediots (tm) who used it for their ego wars. Freebsd-security-devel? Moderated? Lupe Christoph -- | lupe@lupe-christoph.de | http://www.lupe-christoph.de/ | | Big Misunderstandings #6398: The Titanic was not supposed to be | | unsinkable. The designer had a speech impediment. He said: "I have | | thith great unthinkable conthept ..." | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message