From owner-freebsd-security Fri Jul 14 16:28:46 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B9B37C112 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 16:28:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (harmony.village.org [10.0.0.6]) by rover.village.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA67454; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 17:28:37 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.9.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id RAA39908; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 17:28:21 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200007142328.RAA39908@harmony.village.org> To: Mike Hoskins Subject: Re: Displacement of Blame[tm] Cc: Paul Robinson , Neil Blakey-Milner , David Pick , security@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 14 Jul 2000 16:27:11 PDT." References: Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 17:28:21 -0600 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In message Mike Hoskins writes: : On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Paul Robinson wrote: : : > What I would propose is this - why don't we have 2 lists - one for : > freebsd-security where genuine issues with security in the core FreeBSD : > distro are discussed, and another (freebsd-ports-security for example) where : > announcments on ports shipped with FreeBSD are announced. : : I like it. Has this already been proposed and dismissed? If so, : why? Sounds good to me. I can subscribe to both lists, and those who : don't want ports advisories won't have to see them. I don't think it woudl work. Bugtraq would subscribe to both of them and Brett's clients would still be concerned. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message