From owner-freebsd-security Fri Jul 17 20:14:51 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA09742 for freebsd-security-outgoing; Fri, 17 Jul 1998 20:14:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA09737 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 1998 20:14:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA21490; Fri, 17 Jul 1998 20:12:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) To: Craig Spannring cc: bugtraq@netspace.org, Anonymous , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Buffer overflows. was Re: EMERGENCY: new remote root exploit in UW imapd In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 17 Jul 1998 15:49:02 PDT." <199807172249.PAA11364@bangkok.office.cdsnet.net> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 20:12:50 -0700 Message-ID: <21486.900731570@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > The responses I've gotten can be grouped into the following broad > categories- Perhaps I can help. Language wars are an unwonted topic on freebsd-security, whatever the justification, and a meta-discussion on security as a function of one's chosen language is about as useful as a meta-discussion on one's choice of OS. We're here to talk about FreeBSD security, given the current suite of tools and languages that exists today, and anything else is simply irrelevant. In light of this, it's not too surprising that you got the wide variety of feedback that you did. The points may be perfectly valid, but they were raise in the wrong forum. Whatever the outcome of the current discussion, I hope that people are at least now aware of that. Regards, - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message