Re: Clarrification on whether portsnap was affected by the 2012

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:49:13AM +0000, John Bayly wrote:
> Regarding the 2012 compromise, I'm a little confused as to what was and
> wasn't affected:
> 
> >From the release:
> > or of any ports compiled from trees obtained via any means other than
> > through svn.freebsd.org or one of its mirrors
> Does that mean that any ports updated using the standard "portsnap
> fetch" may have been affected, I'm guessing yes.
> 

" We have also verified that the most recently-available portsnap(8) snapshot matches the ports Subversion repository, and so can be fully trusted. "
_______________________________________________
freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"