The 'Security Digest' Archives (TM)

Archive: About | Browse | Search | Contributions | Feedback
Site: Help | Index | Search | Contact | Notices | Changes

ARCHIVE: 'Phage List' - Archives (1988 - 1989)
DOCUMENT: phage #171 [Re: Security Mailing List Reposity Offering] (1 message, 969 bytes)
SOURCE: http://securitydigest.org/exec/display?f=phage/archive/171.txt&t=text/plain
NOTICE: securitydigest.org recognises the rights of all third-party works.

START OF DOCUMENT

From: pleasant@aramis.rutgers.edu (Mel Pleasant)
To: phage
Date: Tue 16:44:39 08/11/1988 EST
Subject: Re: Security Mailing List Reposity Offering
References: [Thread Prev: 151] [Thread Next: 204] [Message Prev: 170] [Message Next: 169]


I realize that I may be only pointing out the obvious ....  There are two
security lists currently under discussion and I get the feeling that some
people are talking about them as if we're talking about one proposed list.
Mark Verber proposed a security list on this mailing list.  It includes some
procedures for gaining access to the list and some suggestions about
archving certain fixes and the like.  Andrew Burt in the meantime is
attempting to revitalize the old security list which died about a year ago.
Andrew has announced this revitalization effort on USENET.  His
announcements include procedures for list membership, etc.

	The jist of the two procedures is very close.  *However*, they
conflict over the philosophical issue of what type of entry appears in the
mailing list itself.  Andrew is all for local control of the distribution of
the mailngs and supports local aliases.  Mark does not.  Andrew's list has
become active enough at least to already start accepting new applicants.
We're going to have mass confusion out there if we attempt to spring a 2nd
security list onto the scene.

	I'd like to suggest that we immediately turn our attention to the
two procedures for accepting membership vis a vis a security mailing list. 

-- Mel

END OF DOCUMENT