Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list] 
Message-ID: <20051020174327.GA18941@openwall.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:43:27 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: xvendor@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: obfuscating e-mails in RPM specs

Hi,

We're about to start obfuscating e-mail addresses in our RPM spec files,
and we intend to update all of our existing specs accordingly.

The syntax we might use is this:

* Sat Sep 24 2005 Solar Designer <solar at owl.openwall.com> 3.6.1p2-owl15

My questions are:

1. Are others doing the same?  What syntax is being used?

2. Is this known to break any software processing spec files or RPMs?
In particular, I guess the extra spaces might break the separation of
fields, so should they be avoided?  Maybe use dashes instead?

3. Is it even worthwhile to try to come up with a common syntax for this?

Thanks,

-- 
Alexander Peslyak <solar at openwall.com>
GPG key ID: B35D3598  fp: 6429 0D7E F130 C13E C929  6447 73C3 A290 B35D 3598
http://www.openwall.com - bringing security into open computing environments

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Please check out the xvendor mailing list charter.