From owner-cvs-all Thu Jan 18 17:58:39 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from green.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ED6137B699; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:58:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (r18081@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by green.dyndns.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0J1wB201566; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:58:12 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from green@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <200101190158.f0J1wB201566@green.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: Kris Kennaway , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/micq Makefile In-Reply-To: Message from Alfred Perlstein of "Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:07:03 PST." <20010118160703.T7240@fw.wintelcom.net> From: "Brian F. Feldman" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:58:11 -0500 Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Kris Kennaway [010118 15:45] wrote: > > kris 2001/01/18 15:45:14 PST > > > > Modified files: > > net/micq Makefile > > Log: > > Remotely exploitable buffer overflow; FORBIDDEN. > > > > Submitted by: recidjvo via Bugtraq > > "Obtained from" he did us no direct favors. Submitted by applies to people, but Obtained from implies that the work to obtain it was done by FreeBSD's committers, therefore I'd say the correct thing in this case would be: Obtained from: Bugtraq (recidjvo ) This makes it clear that the report was gotten from a public source but not sent in. Can we make this the accepted form for situations like this, if there are no strong objects? I say strong because I don't want to help create a bikeshed problem... -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! / green@FreeBSD.org `------------------------------' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message