Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 12:26:21 -0700
From: Vincent Danen <vdanen@...sec.ca>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: charter - advisories

* [2008-02-19 22:44:22 +0300] Solar Designer wrote:

>> It may be a better idea, if desired, to make a separate list that is a
>> fully moderated (or possibly a reject-all with exceptions) list specific
>> to carrying vendor advisories.
>
>Yes, that was my idea too.  However, now that we mention the distinction
>between two kinds of advisories (those for end-users only vs. those
>useful to others as well), I am not sure which of these we want to go to
>that other list.  Should we create a list for advisories that are useful
>for us, then change the above guideline to "no advisories" for the main
>oss-security list?  Or should we create a list for both kinds of
>advisories?  In the latter case, should we ban the useful advisories
>from the main oss-security list or should these be CC'ed to both lists?
>Or should we create two new lists?..

Hmmm... maybe we should clarify the advisories we don't want to see.  I
guess advisories from, say, iDefense, would be valuable.  But advisories
from Mandriva or SUSE not so much.

Maybe we should indicate no *vendor* advisories, and make a second list
specifically for that?

-- 
Vincent Danen @ http://linsec.ca/

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.