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

Re: [suse-security] Tripwire Segmentation Fault error...



Hi,

I don't like your tone, young man ;-)

Seriously. Acting like this isn't helping anyone.

If you're so dependant on Tripwire then install the 8.2 RPM with the
force and nodeps flags or try compiling the source from tripwire.org.

And if that doesn't work, then try another file integrity tool. There
ARE alternatives to Tripwire, you know?

AIDE is a good lead.

In fact, I disagree with you on the MS SuSE comparison. It's totally the
other way around. If SuSE acted like MS they would have just released
the 8.2 RPM in the 9.0 branch and leave it that way since "it works".

The fact that SuSE is actually investing time into a good solution is
very important to me. In the meantime, the security minded admin is
certainly capable to use something else than Tripwire.

just my 0.02€

Tobias W.

Am Mo, den 26.01.2004 schrieb suse@xxxxxx um 16:43:
> Quoting Thomas Biege <thomas@xxxxxxx>:
> >
> > On Sun, 25 Jan 2004, Stefano Bertotti wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Sir, we are near to SuSE 9.1 without official solutions for this
> > > problem in SuSE 9.0 ...
> > >
> > > You have never explained the real nature of the problem.
> > >
> > > Are You supporting the porting solutions from 8.2 proposed in this list
> > > ?
> > >
> > > If the answer is "yes" can You publish the official patch on the
> > > onlineupdate servers, otherwise can You explain this incredible support
> > > delay...?
> >
> > I think you want to write to security@xxxxxxx .
> >
> > Nevertheless, the bug appears due to an interaction with the binutils
> > package. Our maintainer is working on an update (which isn't that easy).
> >
> 
> Rather than have him 'working' on it and leaving the bulk of the SuSE community
> without the benefit of tripwire, why don't you take the copy of the tripwire
> rpm from 8.2 and copy it into the 9.0 branch so that people can actually USE it
> without having to manually go around the normal update system to get it.
> 
> It's all well and good to say it doesn't like our binutils or doesn't want to
> compile with gcc 3.x and to be "working" on it.  However, that does the rest of
> us absolutely no good whatsoever.
> 
> You guys seem to be forgetting the first rule: It has to work.  Having a program
> that actually works in FAR more important than binutil and compiler purity.
> 
> What's the point of a distribution if I have to work AROUND it to get things
> done?  If I wanted to fight my operating system every step of the way, I'd run
> Windows.  SuSE, of course, is far from that level.  But the mentality behind
> how you guys are dealing with tripwire is just like Microsoft.  You seem to
> care more about doing it your way than actually releasing something that works.


-- 
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands, e-mail: suse-security-help@xxxxxxxx
Security-related bug reports go to security@xxxxxxx, not here