| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Stephen Frost" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "Ferindo Middleton" <fmiddleton(at)verizon(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUGS] BUG #2052: Federal Agency Tech Hub Refuses to Accept |
| Date: | 2005-11-25 18:41:51 |
| Message-ID: | 200511251941.52468.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Point 2: CVE is pretty much the industry standard for naming
> vulnerabilities. This is what people *use*. There's no reason *not*
> to provide it as a cross reference. But sure, we shouldn't list only
> the ones that have CVE numbers - if there are any that doesn't, they
> should be listed as well.
Actually, if there are any that don't have a CVE number, then we should
simply ask for one to be assigned.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2005-11-25 18:46:45 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #2052: Federal Agency Tech Hub Refuses to Accept |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-11-25 18:39:43 | Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? |