full-disclosure - RE: SendGate: Sendmail Multiple Vulnerabilities (Race Condition DoS, Memory Jumps, Integer Overflow)

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

Message-ID: <004701c64f9b$030767e0$760a0a0a@transaver.com>
Date: Sat Mar 25 00:24:07 2006
From: maf at mafii.com (Michael A Fusaro II)
Subject: RE: SendGate: Sendmail Multiple Vulnerabilities
	(Race Condition DoS, Memory Jumps, Integer Overflow) 

Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > You would probably expect me to the be last person to say
> > that Sendmail is perfectly within their rights.  I have 
> > had a lot of problems with what they are doing.
> > 
> > But what did you pay for Sendmail?  Was it a dollar, or was 
> > it more?  Let me guess.  It was much less than a dollar.  I 
> > bet you paid nothing.
> > 
> > So does anyone owe you anything, let alone a particular process 
> > which you demand with such length?
> 
Gadi Evron wrote:
> So you are basically saying open source free software can't 
> be trusted to hold high standards or be reliable or secure 
> if I don't pay for it?

What he is basically saying is that you hold no right whatever 
to demand it.

The "International Infrastructure's" need doesn't constitute 
a claim on Sendmail or its developers.  As Theo stated, if 
that's unacceptable, buy software with a commercial license 
(which would then give you the right to demand that trust, as 
included in the license).

--
Michael A Fusaro II
maf@...ii.com