Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:25:45 -0500 From: Adam McDougall <mcdouga9@egr.msu.edu> To: cvs-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/vuxml vuln.xml Message-ID: <4F4E3569.3020402@egr.msu.edu> In-Reply-To: <201202281919.q1SJJ1Pf056109@repoman.freebsd.org> References: <201202281919.q1SJJ1Pf056109@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/28/12 14:19, Chris Rees wrote: > crees 2012-02-28 19:19:01 UTC > > FreeBSD ports repository > > Modified files: > security/vuxml vuln.xml > Log: > Document latest PostgreSQL vulnerabilities > > Security: http://www.postgresql.org/about/news/1377/ > > Revision Changes Path > 1.2620 +36 -1 ports/security/vuxml/vuln.xml > _______________________________________________ I think the postgresql server ports require the client to be installed, but shouldn't vuxml list the server ports as vulnerable too? I think the current state gives a misleading impression of where the vulnerabilities reside and detract attention from upgrading server processes. Thanks.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F4E3569.3020402>