Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:46:18 +0300 (MSK) From: Fedor Gubarev <Fedor.Gubarev@itep.ru> To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: nestea v2 against freebsd 3.0-Release Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.981027093223.3551J-100000@raven.itep.ru> In-Reply-To: <4.1.19981023093637.00af1df0@adm.ujf-grenoble.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I wonder why there is no response at all on this mail. It seems a little bit surprising at least..... On Fri, 23 Oct 1998, Gilles Bruno <Gilles.Bruno@ujf-grenoble.fr> wrote: > Hi everyone, > we tested yesterday the old nestea v2 against a brand new > 3.0-Release : it has prooved to be effective against it > (the box rebooted - invalid page fault while in kernel > mode). The same test against 2.2.[6,7]-Release didn't harm > at all. > > Am I missing something ? some sysctl ? a special kernel config ? > > Let us know... > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.981027093223.3551J-100000>