Bug#675873: RFS: pam-shield/0.9.6-1 [ITA]
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pam-shield"
* Package name : pam-shield
Version : 0.9.6-1
Upstream Author : Walter de Jong <walter@heiho.net> and Jonathan
Niehof <jtniehof@gmail.com>
* URL : https://github.com/jtniehof/pam_shield
* License : GPL2
Section : admin
It builds those binary packages:
libpam-shield - locks out remote attackers trying password guessing
To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:
http://mentors.debian.net/package/pam-shield
Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pam-shield/pam-shield_0.9.6-1.dsc
The full git tree is available from:
git://github.com/jtniehof/pam_shield.git
(debian branch)
Changes since the last upload:
* New maintainer. (Closes: #572656).
* Switch to dpkg-source 3.0 (quilt) format.
* Bump Standards Version to 3.9.3.0. (No changes needed).
* Update to debhelper 8.
-dh_clean now handles *-stamp (7)
-new dh_prep. (7)
-no debhelper 8 specific changes
* New homepage; updated watchfile.
* Lintian fixups:
-Add misc:Depends to control (debhelper-but-no-misc-depends)
-Add override for INSTALL (package-contains-upstream-install-documentation)
-Add DEP-3 headers to patches (quilt-patch-missing-description)
* Rename cron job so run-parts will actually run it.
* Support pam-auth-update. (Closes: #579514)
* New upstream release:
-Add manpage for shield.conf (Closes: #488847).
-Ensure cron job does not return 0 (Closes: #563065).
-Add --force option to shield-purge (Closes: #457642).
-Wait for database if it isn't writable (Closes: #488841).
-Modify shield-purge to work without arguments.
-Fix a memory leak in shield-purge.
-Fix shield-purge to traverse entire database.
-Treat missing DNS parameters properly
-Fix race condition (blocking same IP multiple times)
-Continue on errors from read_config
-Use IP blackhole routing to block
-Optional ufw-based blocking
Regards,
Jonathan Niehof
Reply to: