Re: ATTN: Request for moving SLFS discussion

Miguel Bazdresch <[email protected]> [2003-12-20/13:28]:
> According to the lfs-security description on [...] SLFS looks like a
> perfectly appropriate subject for the list.

Yes, it is.

But there could be (or rather should be) an even more appropriate list.
SLFS seems to be turning into a project now, and that's hardly
appropriate on lfs-security, if you want it read by the masses.
lfs-security goes straight to many people's inbox, unhindered by
procmail recipes; if you keep on filling it up with SLFS project
discussion, you will loose many people who read lfs-security because
they want to be informed about security issues, but do not have the time
at their disposal to read a high-volume list.

You will loose the currently best means of warning people of security
issues and vulnerabilities.

Of course, an alternative could be to create a dedicated list for that
purpose (lfs-security-announce or some such). I don't care which one it
is, but I do think that there is need for a low-volume security issues
list.

Cheers,
Dan

-- 
    Daniel Roethlisberger <[email protected]>
    OpenPGP key id 0x804A06B1 (1024/4096 DSA/ElGamal)
    144D 6A5E 0C88 E5D7 0775 FCFD 3974 0E98 804A 06B1
!->

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-security
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/5FciOXQOmIBKBrERAl8cAJ0aSk0mMr1e5kVarkXN2WASqdY4owCcDoeH
BpnZyosGfnGX0SOStE1RWcg=
=ItgE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----