[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Start of portmap



On Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 12:24:36PM +0200, Christian Kurz wrote:
> 
> Well, it has a priority of standard, which looks for me like it will be
> installed on default installations, which includes a lot of installation
> where it's not needed. And if then get's standard, this creates a
> security hole which is absolutely not needed. So from a security
> standpoint I would prefer that portmap get's only installed when a
> package really depends on it and so I'm not sure if the current priority
> is a good choice.

well nfs-common and nfs-kernel-server are also priority standard, they
obviously depend on portmap, so if portmap is downgraded so will nfs-*
have to be, otherwise they would just drag it in anyway...

downgrading nfs servers is not a bad idea IMO.  

-- 
Ethan Benson
http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/

Attachment: pgp61Q0y0Bzbv.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: