From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 14 07:52:49 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DCA8B8D; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 07:52:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oa0-x229.google.com (mail-oa0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBDE41F7F; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 07:52:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id j17so8929426oag.0 for ; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 00:52:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=Juw2lQM5BDBdH6dO52d8O093tHV/h/u8trMpYwtnpD4=; b=tVcK/rCSnVgHiYTVO2N1lo4POiVSGhON/xH1PSVVrgHre+qjdmAXYxxxeUcSB0aaH0 oLGnCF/awcSqMpoCZC+ZNGV5DezWsNzXP7nNcr7a7ZV5ahuLDt3iehv1q0/x2jjAKPz5 i30fa+7h2OjGgcu79slSmRWl4G7dlcHxfOH91sbg84sWrfSmbWWIQgyPGA/aLrnDwPVL GiM+RYga/+Kf88QX38/Eipn2Ew65Kes/ibtwbEpRX9BfOk90QgOesn4EoHVsYpeY1R4e EAv7yxFl1w/bwV/ZQTaIH42muNyFaefodis4lT+XgtaknlS6+3WeqByUUnGdeqcRQUyi g2kg== X-Received: by 10.60.55.97 with SMTP id r1mr33684212oep.5.1397461967547; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 00:52:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.76.173.129 with HTTP; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 00:52:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20140411094620.78881cjb990bw8gc@webmail.ru.ac.za> <7a39fee1d8baee8029d01a13bcc4cce8.authenticated@ultimatedns.net> From: n j Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 09:52:27 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: MITM attacks against portsnap and freebsd-update To: freebsd-hackers , FreeBSD Questions Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 07:52:49 -0000 On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:38 PM, David Noel wrote: > > I should have said "phased out" instead of "retired". > > Even if it was retired immediately users could still stay on whatever > release they were on; they'd only have to install subversion. > I was under the impression that portsnap was not there just because there was no svn in base, but also to make updating the ports more efficient - downloading a compressed archive and extracting it locally seems faster than checking out thousands of ports files (assume system is not updated regularly)? -- Nino