full-disclosure - [disclosure] Re: Subject prefix changing! READ THIS! SURVEY!!

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: bruno_fob at bellsouth.net (Bruno)
Subject: [disclosure] Re: Subject prefix changing!
 READ THIS! SURVEY!!

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 00:39:15 -0600
Michael Berg <mberg447@...cast.net> wrote:

> I agree the current [Full-Disclosure] needs to be dropped.
> 
> I'd personally prefer to see it shortened to [FD] (option #2) since I 
> follow Full-Disclosure and bugtraq (and maintain archives of interesting 
> threads on both lists).  Given that a number of messages are cross 
> posted to both lists, having some extra unique tag to match (like an 
> [FD] in the subject) allows me to easily separate duplicate cross posts 
> into the appropriate archive folders for each list.
> 
> I could live with option #1 (no prefix at all) as well, but it would be 
> a slight annoyance at times.
> 
> >   Hey folks,
> >
> >   ALL LIST MEMBERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO RESPOND AND MAKE A CHOICE AS TO HOW
> >   THEY WANT THIS BASIC FUNCTION OF THE LIST TO CONTINUE OPERATING.
> >
> >   The subject header is going to change.
> >
> >   This is a survey to see whether people want:
> >
> >   1. To have no subject prefix, that is, we remove [Full-Disclosure]
> >   or
> >   2. To shorten the subject prefix from [Full-Disclosure] to [FD]
> >   or
> >   3. Do nothing
> >
> >   1. The first choice is preferable for me and, I would hope, for most
> >   folks. Len says he didn't really want it when he started the list
> >   anyways. So we are actually going to change it now.
> >
> >   2. Choice two may be preferable for people who can only filter their
> >   incoming messages based on the subject prefix. So, if you WANT there to
> >   continue to be a subject prefix, SPEAK UP!!!
> >
> >   3. Choice three sucks and if anyone wants this SPEAK UP so we know just
> >   how many people want this. This is the least preferrable as it clutters
> >   the Subject header and makes the list harder to read through for those
> >   of us using a text based e-mail client.
> 
> 
> -- 
> The difference between common-sense and paranoia is that common-sense
> is thinking everyone is out to get you. That's normal -- they are.
> Paranoia is thinking that they're conspiring.
>                 -- J. Kegler
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

I prefer option 2, as this will make keeping filters up to date a lot simpler.
-- 
Bruno
-----
"If you listen and think, we'll get
finished quicker."