sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery)
- From: Bas van Gils <Bas.vanGils AT cs.ru.nl>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery)
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:12:37 +0100
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 10:22:16AM -0800, Andrew wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 07:15:53PM +0100, Eric Schabell wrote:
> > So as we see again, even when you get what you want, it ain't enough...
>
> If you had read my emails on this topic you would have noticed that i
> pointed out that I would need to have access to the mirrors. If nothing
> else because of the way mirroring is done. Im sorry you cannot comphrehend
> my explaination of the security risks inherent in letting just anyone
> be a mirror.
It's been a while since I read Andrew's message on the security risks
involved. Unfortuantely I don't have the time to search through the archive to
re-read it but... eventhough I'm not an expert I can't help but wonder:
suppose we *do* have sorcery mirrors, despite the security risks involved.
Isn't it the responsibility of individual users to *pick* a mirror over the
default download location for sorcery?
The point is: on my box, *I* am responsible for security (i.e. firewall,
patches of ssh etcetera). *I* pick which software I install and *I* choose
which grimoire from which location I download. why not sorcery?
Perhaps I misunderstood Andrews post but these are my five cents..
> But again, take your flames elsewhere.
Quit the bickering. Eric (hay have) had a good point.
Bas
--
<Bas.vanGils AT cs.ru.nl> - GPG Key ID: 2768A493 - http://www.cs.ru.nl/~basvg
Radboud University Nijmegen Institute for Computing and Information Sciences
Attachment:
pgpx2M6gJLs1P.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Seth Alan Woolley, 11/24/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Andrew, 11/24/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Eric Schabell, 11/24/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Andrew, 11/24/2004
- Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery), Seth Alan Woolley, 11/24/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Bas van Gils, 11/24/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Seth Alan Woolley, 11/24/2004
- Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery), Bas van Gils, 11/25/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Seth Alan Woolley, 11/24/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Andrew, 11/24/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Seth Alan Woolley, 11/24/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
David Kowis, 11/24/2004
- Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery), Thomas HOUSSIN, 11/26/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
David Kowis, 11/24/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Eric Schabell, 11/24/2004
-
Re: Sorcery mirroring (Was: Re: [SM-Discuss] Don't updated todays [snip] sorcery),
Andrew, 11/24/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.