From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17883 invoked by uid 1002); 11 Sep 2003 07:11:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 14572 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2003 07:11:24 -0000 From: Ned Ludd Reply-To: solar@gentoo.org To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-nt3At0Vs6wps7AEHuMP+" Organization: Gentoo Linux Developer (Hardened) Message-Id: <1063264091.31386.11.camel@simple> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.3 Date: 11 Sep 2003 03:08:11 -0400 Subject: [gentoo-dev] Linux-PAM != 0.77 X-Archives-Salt: 72c890c8-f62c-49bf-b003-a4bdb972a380 X-Archives-Hash: 3d51b12f5eea1a81b81d5027e961a142 --=-nt3At0Vs6wps7AEHuMP+ Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Anybody know off the top of there heads any reason why we have not moved to a newer version of pam? 0.77 is current at kernel.org and 0.75 (what were using) might have some security risks as listed in http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D22944 --=20 RSA key ID 2BC75196 http://keyserver.net Gentoo Linux Developer (Hardened) http://dev.gentoo.org/~solar --=-nt3At0Vs6wps7AEHuMP+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iQCVAwUAP2AfW54WFLgrx1GWAQJxtAQAsUabFdlyR7uCF2oLX3uwncXPI3zh11FW KRMRyUFae3fgQpD3LSCQN4gjBezFuJUDxMrqzuJBX5r+Q8xQSVMv16dvsQqUsKCX ZcHml57lt9wza+WsBAgQ9kXCsT9D2pJ3/gzspbdOq8Eyb1hV3PAq5EIWsVe9AtAo KbfTt80W4SE= =8NFG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-nt3At0Vs6wps7AEHuMP+--