From owner-cvs-all Wed Apr 4 15:55:57 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D996737B718; Wed, 4 Apr 2001 15:55:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (robert@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f34Mtqh28247; Wed, 4 Apr 2001 18:55:52 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 18:55:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Nick Sayer Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/mail/pine4-ssl Makefile distinfo pkg-comment pkg-descr pkg-install pkg-plist ports/mail/pine4-ssl/files extrapatch-aa extrapatch-ab pgpdecode pgpencrypt pgpsign In-Reply-To: <200104042154.f34LsWp65933@freefall.freebsd.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Last I checked, and this was a while ago, the pine-ssl port was fairly broken in that its SSL implementation did not perform any certificate validation, meaning it was susceptible to man-in-the-middle attacks. Has this imporved? If not, SSL support for Pine should be strongly labeled as dangerous. If it has improved, that is great news. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Nick Sayer wrote: > nsayer 2001/04/04 14:54:32 PDT > > Removed files: > mail/pine4-ssl Makefile distinfo pkg-comment pkg-descr > pkg-install pkg-plist > mail/pine4-ssl/files extrapatch-aa extrapatch-ab pgpdecode > pgpencrypt pgpsign > Log: > Scrap pine4-ssl port as a separate entity. Shortly the pine4 port will > get a WITH_SSL=yes option, hopefully. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message