On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 01:13:29AM +0000, Stephen Gran wrote: > This one time, at band camp, Milan P. Stanic said: > > On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 03:43:33PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > > For the unstable distribution (sid) this problem has been fixed in > > > version 0.86-1. > > ^^ > > Clamav in testing and unstable is version 0.88.6 > > Yes, and the problem was fixed in version 0.86. That was the point of > that statement. Shouldn't then the DSA say something like "unstable (sid) and testing (etch) aren't vulnerable because the problem was fixed in version 0.86 already and the clamav in that two releases is version 0.88.6 which is not vulnerable"? As it is now it is ambiguous, at least for me.
Description: Digital signature