[SLUG] Re: Unpatched FF

[Al Girling]

On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 09:12:49AM GMT, Stephen O'Neill wrote:
> Al Girling wrote:
> >or are you assuming that because it isn't
> >Firefox-1.0.7 or Firefox-1.5 that it must be unpatched?
> >  
> Hi Al, I may be showing a lack of knowledge - I'm assuming that 
> Firefox-1.0.4 is unpatched in that there were a number of gaping 
> security holes sorted between that and 1.0.7.

I see what you're saying, but I think you're missing the details of the
stable/testing/unstable model used by Debian and others.  Those opting
for unstable get a fast moving fluid system with up to date packages
which both maintain security and brake things with equal speed as I see
it.  Testing users get systems with packages a few weeks older than
those using unstable.  I think I'm right in saying this doesn't include
security updates, but the updates arriving from unstable covers this
anyway.  Stable users get no new packages just security updates, so a
package may be old but still secure, provided you maintain a regular
updating schedule of course. ;)

*BSD users seem to use much older packages than most Linux users would
accept in their stable releases e.g. a shell account I have on a Net BSD
system uses mutt-1.4.1i while here I'm using mutt-1.5.9i.  Both distros
security teams provide the necessary updates for the older packages to
save people chasing the latest and greatest all the time.

> I'm just disappointed that you're not in awe of my ability to spot a 
> user-agent in an apache log file!

Aww! Sorry! ;)  You should realise that as someone who also tinkers a
little with web design I spend time reading log files too.  I'm
currently trying to figure out who the other Linux x86_64 user is who's
been looking at the Burythorpe site.  There's obviously mine, Paul
Teasdale has had a look too, but there is a third.  Who is this mystery
person?

Toodle pip,

Al

-- 
Al Girling

Home page:                  <http://al.sdf-eu.org>
Linux User: #290080         <http://counter.li.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/scarborough/attachments/20051207/47c203e8/attachment.bin