Re: [Full-Disclosure] Service Pack 2, don't discuss it here.
From: A.V. (pahalial.lists_at_gmail.com)
To: Tom Russell <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:43:48 +0200
I beg to differ and would have to side with Niek. This may belong on
Focus on MS or such a list, but this list deals with vulnerability
information and discussion.
Let's check the charter:
"Any information pertaining to vulnerabilities is acceptable" - notice
that this makes no mention of discussing whether a patch breaks
applications, since this isn't a vulnerability.
Now, if we were discussing an exploit and someone said "This has been
fixed by SP2" or "SP2 should have fixed this but didn't", or "SP2
causes this", then sure, that's appropriate. But "SP2 broke my
computer please help" belongs somewhere else.
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:21:52 +0100, Tom Russell <email@example.com> wrote:
> This is a security mailing list.
> Windows XP SP2 represents possibly the most fundamental change in
> windows internet policies for quite a long time.
> It also includes - supposedly - features that make it less prone to
> virus attack and buffer overflow exploits.
> Both of these are related to security.
> I'd say this is one of the best places to discuss sp2.
> Tom Russell.
> > That's right, go pollute somewhere else.
> > We do not need reports from people whose cardreader doesn't work any
> > longer after they installed SP2 on a production machine.
> > Go away!
> > Regards,
> > Niek Baakman
> > _______________________________________________
> > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.