Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 12:58:47 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> To: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> Cc: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/portaudit-db/database portaudit.txt portaudit.xlist portaudit.xml Message-ID: <20040817175847.GC43426@madman.celabo.org> In-Reply-To: <56FC3488-F075-11D8-924A-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com> References: <20040817122453.05edaaea@localhost> <56FC3488-F075-11D8-924A-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Moving to freebsd-vuxml ... oh how I wish Bcc worked so that people on
the other list knew where this went :-) ]
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 07:46:16PM +0200, Oliver Eikemeier wrote:
> When you can live with the dummy text produced by my perl script
> ("Please contact the FreeBSD Security Team for more information.") and
> we can make the `discovered' entry optional, fine with me. I can write
> a `make entry' perl script that parses a form an generates a template
> entry, send-pr like.
FWIW, this sounds fine by me, except about the <discovered> part.
I see your point about it though... it may be dangerous to have a
bogus value (like the date of entry), because it may not get corrected
later. But I don't want it optional, so that it is not forgotten.
Perhaps we need the possiblity of marking something explicitly
<unspecified> for such occassions ...
In the mean time, could the date of entry be used? And perhaps a
comment could be a workaround for now, something like
<discovered>2004-08-17</discovered> <!-- XXX please correct --->
Ugly, I know, but the current format wasn't made for
works-in-progress. Maybe we can make some options for that...
> >In place of arguing, start forging some code to check the base
> >system against the security listings in vuln.xml.
>
> portaudit could easily do that. The only thing useful here would be to
> use __FreeBSD_versions, so we can check -STABLE and -CURRENT too. Or can
> I map the version numbers somehow? I added __FreeBSD_versions in the
> last entry (multiple CVS vulnerabilities), but they are commented out
> since I don't know what the right syntax is.
By way of example, I've been using FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE-p1 == 4.7_1. I'm
not entirely satisfied and I am open to suggestions. This part has been
ill-specified. :-(
Cheers,
--
Jacques Vidrine / nectar@celabo.org / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040817175847.GC43426>