nominate for removal: ethereal
Stephen Smoogen
smoogen at lanl.gov
Thu Jul 8 15:41:02 UTC 2004
On Thu, 2004-07-08 at 09:27, Phil Knirsch wrote:
> Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 16:43, seth vidal wrote:
> >
> >>So, would it be completely inappropriate to nominate ethereal for
> >>removal from fc3 due to its spotty history of security problems?
> >>
> >>It seems like an excellent place to start thinking of packages that
> >>should be maintained, in fedora extras, by the people interested in
> >>using them, not by the central developers at red hat.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Are most of the problems in ethereal or in libpcap? libpcap seems to
> > have a spottier record.. but that would mean a lot more packages to be
> > removed.
> >
>
> Actually, ethereal itself has had many more security erratas than
> tcpdump/libpcap (i'd say roughly 10 times as many).
>
> So although tcpdump and libpcap sometimes have a security errata, it's
> by for not as serious as ethereal.
>
> Read ya, Phil
My mistake.. I need to sleep more before posting.
--
Stephen John Smoogen smoogen at lanl.gov
Los Alamos National Lab CCN-5 Sched 5/40 PH: 4-0645
Ta-03 SM-1498 MailStop B255 DP 10S Los Alamos, NM 87545
-- Please, I have had too much of the stupid today. Please wait until
-- tomorrow to say these things so my tolerance has refreshed.
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list