[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110414105709.59c835fe@orphan>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:57:09 +0200
From: Tomas Hoger <thoger@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: RE: [security-vendor] Closed list
Hi Zhenfeng!
Now that I'm already known for being corporatishly evil against smaller
distros... ;)
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 09:04:05 +0000 Zhao, Zhenfeng wrote:
> uid Zhenfeng Zhao (Wind River) <security-vendor@...driver.com>
My understanding of the membership rules is that the aim is to avoid
exploders or other mechanisms that may make it easier to change who is
receiving mails without list admin and members being aware of such
change. While this may not be an exploder address now, for addresses
like security@, they seem to be less likely to be closed once the
people behind them decide to move on and are replaced by someone else.
It seems there may be more pressure to hand matching private key over
during the transition of responsibilities from one person to another.
Just my 2c.
--
Tomas Hoger / Red Hat Security Response Team
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
