From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 27 19:48:39 2004 Return-Path: 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 6CC1316A4CE; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:48:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail22.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail22.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.133.160]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A93D243D1D; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:48:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au) Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (c211-30-75-229.belrs2.nsw.optusnet.com.au [211.30.75.229]) i9RJmbTZ012519 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Thu, 28 Oct 2004 05:48:37 +1000 Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (localhost.alcatel.com.au [127.0.0.1])i9RJmaxP096633; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 05:48:36 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from pjeremy@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au) Received: (from pjeremy@localhost)i9RJmaBM096632; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 05:48:36 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from pjeremy) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 05:48:36 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy To: Colin Percival Message-ID: <20041027194835.GD79646@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> References: <417EAC7E.2040103@wadham.ox.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <417EAC7E.2040103@wadham.ox.ac.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: please test: Secure ports tree updating X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting] List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:48:39 -0000 On Tue, 2004-Oct-26 20:58:54 +0100, Colin Percival wrote: >CVSup is slow, insecure, and a memory hog. However, until now >it's been the only option for keeping an up-to-date ports tree, ... > >To provide a secure, lightweight, and fast alternative to CVSup, >I've written portsnap. It sounds like you've re-invented CTM rather than a CVSup replacement. Would you care to provide a comparison of portsnap with CTM? Based on your description, the differences are: - portsnap uses HTTP, CTM uses either FTP or mail. - portsnap is always signed, CTM is only signed via mail. - CTM is part of the base system - ports-cur CTM deltas are currently generated every 8 hours -- Peter Jeremy