Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 13:26:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: R P Herrold <herrold@...river.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Closed list

On Mon, 4 Apr 2011, Tomas Hoger wrote:

> Given the aim to keep the subscriber list very limited, this probably
> falls into a tentatively subscribed category too.  AFAIK, CentOS has
> rather few components that are not rebuilds of the RHEL SRPMs, the
> question is how often a v-s info was useful in the past in providing
> security updates for those extra packages.

Thanks for the post furthering the marketing goals of your 
corporate master; perhaps the security goal of making sure the 
Linux server space is well-secured in a timely fashion was 
overlooked by you as you framed your thought

Seemingly (you mention 'AFAIK'), you do not follow the 
'extras' archive, nor the 'testing' where extensions are 
found, past what Red Hat ships by default in its enterprise 
product

I have regularly flagged to our updates builder sub-group, for 
slotting in updates to push out vulnerable content in those 
side archives, based on vendor-sec notes; further, in ranking 
the 'urgency' of a push, I posted a rather detailed package by 
package analysis of un-pushed updates, in the last month or 
so, as to matters pending during the intersticial 'solve the 
rebuild' delay as to some updates issued upstream but not yet 
pushed by the CentOS team, in part based upon tracking 
vendor-sec

-- Russ herrold
 	herrold@...tos.org

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.