oss-security - Re: [pfx] Postfix stable release 3.11.2 and legacy releases 3.10.9, 3.9.10, 3.8.16

Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87jytj86zk.fsf@gentoo.org>
Date: Mon, 04 May 2026 17:38:55 +0100
From: Sam James <sam@...too.org>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
Subject: Re: [pfx] Postfix stable release 3.11.2 and legacy releases 3.10.9,
 3.9.10, 3.8.16

Sam James <sam@...too.org> writes:

> The most significant one here seems to be the first entry under "Fixed
> in Postfix 3.8, 3.9, 3.10:".
>
> -------------------- Start of forwarded message --------------------
> To: Postfix announce <postfix-announce@...tfix.org>
> Date: Sun, 3 May 2026 19:43:27 -0400 (EDT)
> CC: Postfix users <postfix-users@...tfix.org>
> Subject: [pfx] Postfix stable release 3.11.2 and legacy releases 3.10.9, 3.9.10, 3.8.16
> From: Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <postfix-users@...tfix.org>
>
> [An on-line version of this announcement will be available at
> https://www.postfix.org/announcements/postfix-3.11.2.html]
>
> [...]

I am interested in feedback on whether using my own judgement is
acceptable for bringing these to oss-security, where I believe they may
of interest (releases with fixes that appear security-related, as the
volume is increasing with the current wave of new tooling (*)),
or whether there are some guidelines I should apply.

Thanks in advance.

(*) I of course only plan to bring such things where I plan to treat
them at least in part as a security bug downstream.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (419 bytes)

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.