From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBABA138DB0 for ; Sat, 15 Oct 2016 23:40:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 69607E0A40; Sat, 15 Oct 2016 23:40:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alt1.smtp6.plusvps.com (alt1.smtp6.plusvps.com [89.201.164.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AE85E09AF for ; Sat, 15 Oct 2016 23:40:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lin16.mojsite.com ([178.218.164.164]) by smtp6.plusvps.com with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1bvYZG-00027C-1j for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 01:40:42 +0200 Received: from 93-136-98-42.adsl.net.t-com.hr ([93.136.98.42]:47252 helo=g0n.localdomain) by lin16.mojsite.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1bvYZE-00066X-OG for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 01:40:40 +0200 Received: by g0n.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 04AFC89F; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 01:41:31 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 01:41:31 +0200 From: Miroslav Rovis To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Old Firefox ebuild? Message-ID: <20161015234131.GF12322@g0n.xdwgrp> References: <20161014175927.8360.2C6B93AA@matica.foolinux.mooo.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ULyIDA2m8JTe+TiX" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.0 (2016-08-17) X-PlusHosting-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail Service Provider for details, Found to be clean X-PlusHosting-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-Spam-Status: No, No X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - lin16.mojsite.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - croatiafidelis.hr X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: lin16.mojsite.com: authenticated_id: miro.rovis@croatiafidelis.hr X-Authenticated-Sender: lin16.mojsite.com: miro.rovis@croatiafidelis.hr X-PlusHosting-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-PlusHosting-MailScanner-ID: 1bvYZG-00027C-1j X-PlusHosting-MailScanner-From: miro.rovis@croatiafidelis.hr X-Archives-Salt: bd45bc8f-cf0e-442e-bd2c-9df192a7f85c X-Archives-Hash: dce2120bb6198c2b1fda55252b00906e --ULyIDA2m8JTe+TiX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 161014-21:39+0300, Alexey Mishustin wrote: > Hello. >=20 > 2016-10-14 21:02 GMT+03:00 Ian Zimmerman : > > Does anyone have a copy of the firefox 38.x ebuild around? >=20 > Attached. >=20 > > The latest update wiped it out, and now if I take the plunge to the > > current versions (i.e. at least 45.x) and I find then insufferable, >=20 > Agree! > I may agree too, if some facts fall into place. Read on. I was wondering how safe is running Firefox 38.x at this day and age? If you look up: http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/09/mozilla-checks-if-firefox-is-affect= ed-by-same-malware-vulnerability-as-tor/ ( continued and improved from: https://hackernoon.com/tor-browser-exposed-anti-privacy-implantation-at-mas= s-scale-bd68e9eb1e95#.ctpp9u5fl ) and especially the Jacob Appelbaum's: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/detecting-certificate-authority-compromise= s-and-web-browser-collusion So if you recall (some of the readers must have read those) the issues there, and how badly Firefox was exposed and pretty often, then my query is how do you assess how secure Firefox 38.x that you install might be? Regards! --=20 Miroslav Rovis Zagreb, Croatia http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr --ULyIDA2m8JTe+TiX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJYAr6rAAoJEOqYhIhPuvCu8PwQALV8TinoR+fVhLxsHSuEQXyG gZgCd0w9nYm82zE6FzvyeYfcF/K186OICMMZJdYmyfJJcFRvJGeGvvjl/UmkT+vr J79hjnssMZGjoBr96lRicwrBaQfvj+HcxLU/2AQ7w0MxBZm2edyHq8M/xDHFYw10 Vy1HdMmzE9Ir0vzRkylJjLidPmAu7OC63ZIuYDKGlz/qfLkSDYvY9F3eSKbyiZwW hsLSS8pnx4j/6z8XQA6/2yoZZFm37Y5GOG/cXurJcKdoK5sWpteevh7FaALcIIU9 KljP/agdZUqKUXmduqlKyIyiv1JiZTuMKxusDzzr86tOkYfzesxB9xSAUL1zUgos 1jmmwwft1DHnDJURboWr5SpjQW1nspwn50fW6WMZGNLYt82K5TI72lMUFSN0xHTd VwnYGaPtr2zBCEJKApuRVIML7P+jpHEWPQlJxVY2a/G357zok9tBvd60THmRUOh0 mSZpZ8SluxHMhWi5DHGvFBs//PyYIkY+Wjpt+0C7Dc9i1/8lScaJA1/PG1GxT5kD ME32X1KDzAYwq62MYuJ6CD0+eQWxkadt8BjYWTAVGrb5R/HXSGd+NNFG/HEATNSw kB6YSywDMhoCzkXal5VhX7a93oEylycX3b1B+Fp+aiMNk6q5HyCBou2eM07oA0qC HMUZu8m5Q5AlNyBrNQXi =5JjI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ULyIDA2m8JTe+TiX--